Will the Arkansas AG interpret a county ordinance and a court settlement to answer a sales-tax question?
Plain-English summary
The Carroll County prosecuting attorney asked whether Ordinance 2000-39 (the local sales-tax measure) and the Reeve v. Carroll County settlement permit the county to use excess sales-tax revenue for capital projects: expanding the sheriff's office and detention complex, building a new public building (like a courthouse) on the existing complex property, or building a new courthouse, all without an election.
The AG declined to answer. The reason: each question requires interpreting the local ordinance and the settlement agreement. The AG's office has a longstanding policy to decline construing local ordinances when issuing official opinions (Ops. 2019-067, 2015-020, 2004-173, 98-160). The construction of local instruments is fact-intensive work that the AG's office is not staffed or authorized to do.
The right channel for these questions is the county attorney or other local counsel. They have the time, the local knowledge, the documents, and the standing to interpret the ordinance and the settlement.
This is a useful procedural opinion that tells you how the AG's office allocates its work. AG opinions tackle questions of state law that have statewide application. Local instrument interpretation belongs at the local level. The same logic explains why the AG generally declines to interpret specific contracts, deeds, school district policies, and other local-level documents.
What this means for you
County and city officials with local-instrument questions
If your question requires interpreting a city or county ordinance, a settlement agreement, a contract, or a similar local document, the AG will probably decline. Save the time: take the question to your city or county attorney first. If the county attorney's analysis turns up a state-law issue (statutory interpretation, constitutional question), the AG can address that part. The pure interpretation of the local instrument is local-counsel work.
For sales-tax measures specifically, build the original ordinance with clear use-of-proceeds language. If excess revenues will be used for purposes beyond the original capital project, say so up front in the ordinance. Avoid the situation where future officials have to litigate or guess what the original drafters meant.
County attorneys
When the prosecuting attorney or quorum court asks about local-ordinance interpretation, you are the right person to answer. Read the ordinance and the related settlement agreement carefully. Identify whether:
- The original ordinance defined the use of proceeds narrowly (e.g., for a specific named capital project) or broadly (e.g., for "county capital improvements").
- The settlement agreement adds restrictions or commitments not in the ordinance.
- Excess revenues are addressed at all.
- An election is required for new uses (under the original ordinance language and under any state-law sales-tax statutes governing voter approval).
If you find the original instruments ambiguous, recommend a quorum court resolution clarifying use-of-proceeds. If the ambiguity affects taxpayer rights, recommend a declaratory-judgment action.
Prosecuting attorneys
When you receive a county-question that depends on local-instrument interpretation, route it to the county attorney rather than the AG. Save the AG opinion request for state-law questions: statutory authority for the proposed action, constitutional limits on the action, conflict-of-interest analysis under state statutes, etc.
Quorum court members and county judges
If you are weighing a capital project funded from existing sales-tax revenue, get a written legal opinion from the county attorney before authorizing the spending. The opinion should address: (1) does the ordinance authorize this use; (2) does the settlement allow this use; (3) does state law require an election for this use. If any answer is no or uncertain, plan accordingly (an amendment, a clarifying ordinance, or an election).
Taxpayers and watchdogs
When a county proposes to spend sales-tax revenue on a project, ask the county attorney for the legal basis. The county attorney's written opinion should be a public record and should explain how the use is consistent with the original ordinance and any settlement. If the county attorney's analysis is thin or absent, that is a flag worth surfacing publicly.
State legislators considering AG-opinion procedures
This opinion is part of the AG's recurring practice of declining categories of questions. The pattern is published in opinion language and traced through Ops. 2019-067, 2015-020, 2004-173, and 98-160. If you want the AG to take a more interpretive role on local instruments, you would need to amend the AG opinion-issuing statute (or fund the AG's office to expand its capacity).
Common questions
Why doesn't the AG just interpret the ordinance? They have the legal staff.
Because the AG's office is structured around state-law questions of general applicability, not local-instrument interpretation. The AG opinion process is fast and consultative; deep local-instrument analysis takes time and requires local context (legislative history of the ordinance, intent of the original drafters, history of administration). The county attorney has all of that.
Can I get a court declaration on the ordinance interpretation?
Yes, a declaratory-judgment action under A.C.A. § 16-111-101 et seq. can resolve interpretation disputes. Ripe candidates include disputes between the county and a taxpayer, between two county officials, or where the county wants pre-approval of a planned use.
The settlement was court-approved. Doesn't that make it a court order?
Court-approved settlements have judicial enforcement. If the county acts contrary to the settlement, parties to the settlement can enforce it. The settlement's terms still need interpretation if they are ambiguous, and that interpretation also belongs to the court (or to the parties' counsel as a first cut).
What does "excess revenue" mean here?
Generally, sales-tax measures specify what the revenue can be used for. If the measure was passed for a specific project (e.g., "to build the sheriff's office and detention complex"), excess revenue after that project is built may be subject to specific rules in the ordinance, in state statute, or in the settlement. Without the documents, neither the AG nor anyone else can answer.
Can the county hold another election to authorize new uses?
Probably yes, depending on state law. Sales-tax measures generally allow re-authorization through new ballot measures. A new ballot measure that gets voter approval is the cleanest legal route to repurposing tax revenue.
Could the AG opine on the state-law sales-tax framework that applies?
Possibly. If the county attorney's analysis turns up a clear state-law question (e.g., does state statute require voter approval for any sales-tax-funded capital project), that question could be referred to the AG. The opinion here declined the local-instrument question; it does not bar future state-law questions.
Background and statutory framework
The AG's policy of declining to construe local ordinances is well-established and recurring. Examples cited in this opinion include Ops. 2019-067, 2015-020, 2004-173, and 98-160. The reasoning, set out in Op. 2019-035 and others, is that local-instrument construction is fact-intensive and that the AG's office is not staffed for that kind of work.
Arkansas county sales taxes are governed by A.C.A. ch. 14, subch. 164, and various other tax-specific provisions. Voter-approval requirements depend on the specific tax type and the use of proceeds.
For the substantive questions Carroll County is asking, A.C.A. § 16-111-101 et seq. (declaratory judgment) provides the procedural channel for resolving interpretation disputes if local-counsel analysis is not enough.
Citations
- Ark. Att'y Gen. Ops. 2019-067, 2019-035, 2015-020, 2004-173, 98-160 (AG declines to construe local ordinances)
Source
Original opinion text
Opinion No. 2023-057
July 13, 2023
The Honorable Robert T. Rogers, II
Prosecuting Attorney
Nineteenth East Judicial District
Post Office Box 536
Berryville, Arkansas 72616
Dear Mr. Rogers:
I am writing in response to your request for an opinion on whether the provisions of a county ordinance and a court-approved settlement agreement permit Carroll County to use excess sales-tax revenue to pay for certain capital improvements without first calling an election.
Unfortunately, I am unable to respond to your specific inquiries. To answer to your questions, I would need to interpret the ordinance and the settlement agreement. But it has long been this office's policy to decline to construe local ordinances when rendering official opinions. Such construction necessarily involves a fact-intensive inquiry that this office lacks the resources and authority to undertake when issuing opinions. Your questions would be better directed to the county attorney or other local counsel to whom the county usually looks for advice.
Senior Assistant Attorney General Kelly Summerside prepared this opinion, which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
TIM GRIFFIN
Attorney General