Could Amite require 72 hours' notice for a special council meeting when state law required 24?

Plain-English summary

Amite's mayor asked whether a town ordinance requiring notice of special council meetings to be mailed 72 hours beforehand conflicted with a state statute requiring written public notice at least 24 hours before a meeting. The Attorney General said the 72-hour period met the state minimum. If the council considered the ordinance necessary for proper municipal management, the state notice statute would not prevent the longer period and the ordinance would be valid and enforceable.

The AG read the state's 24-hour rule as a minimum lead time. The request described an extraordinary-emergency exception, but the AG did not analyze its effect on the ordinance's validity.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Could the town set a longer notice period than state law?
Yes, if the council considered the ordinance necessary for proper municipal management. The AG said the proposed 72-hour period met the state statute's 24-hour minimum.

Did the 72-hour rule conflict with the state's minimum?
No. The opinion said earlier notice satisfied the then-current state rule.

Did the ordinance cover extraordinary emergencies?
The request described an exception for extraordinary emergencies. The AG did not analyze that exception.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read LA R.S. 33:361's municipal powers together with LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i)'s then-current written public-notice deadline.

Citations and references

• LA R.S. 33:361
• LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/01-0109

Original opinion text

May 17, 2001
OPINION 01-109

90 – B – 4 PUBLIC MEETINGS – State & Local Governing Bodies
The Honorable R.E. Goldsby, M.D. LA R.S. 33:361
Mayor of the Town of Amite
LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i)
212 E. Oak Street
It is statutorily permissible to mandate that notice
Amite, Louisiana 70422
for special meetings be given sooner than the
minimum requirement set forth in LA R.S. 42:7
Dear Mayor Goldsby: (b)(i).

We are in receipt of your request for an Attorney General’s Opinion concerning an ordinance passed by the Amite City Council, which addresses notification for special meetings of the Amite City Council. Specifically, you ask whether Amite City Council Ordinance No. 3 –1998, which provides for notification of special meetings of the city council to be mailed seventy-two (72) hours before the meeting (save extraordinary emergencies), conflicts with LA R.S. 42:7(b)(i), which provides for written public notice of special meetings be given twenty-four (24) hours before the meeting.

In addressing your inquiry, LA R.S. 33:361 states, in pertinent part:

A municipality shall be vested with all powers, rights, privileges, immunities, authorities, and duties heretofore possessed in accordance with all constitutional and statutory provisions with respect thereto. A municipality is further authorized to exercise any power and perform any function necessary, requisite, or proper for the management of its affairs not denied by law.

Under the authority granted by this statute, a municipality such as the Town of Amite may pass ordinances that it feels necessary for the management of its affairs, as long as such an exercise of power is not denied by another statute. As you mentioned in your request, your concern is centered on LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i), a statute that specifically states:

All public bodies, except the legislature and its committees and subcommittees, shall give written public notice of any regular, special, or rescheduled meeting no later than twenty-four hours before the meeting.

Page 2

Mayor R.E. Goldsby, M.D.
Opinion No. 01-109
Page 2

The wording of LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i) specifically states that the notification be given “no latter than twenty-four hours before the meeting.” Therefore, it is statutorily permissible to mandate that such notice be given sooner than the minimum requirement set forth in LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i). The time period of seventy-two (72) hours as proposed by Ordinance No. 3 – 1998 would therefore be acceptable as it meets the statutory minimum requirement.

Therefore, it is the opinion of this office that if the Amite City Council is of the opinion that Ordinance No. 3 – 1998 is necessary for the proper management of the municipality, LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i) does not prevent said ordinance from extending the notice time requirement. As such, the ordinance is valid and enforceable.

We hope this opinion addresses all of your concerns. If we can be of further assistance, please advise.

Yours very truly,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: _______
ANDREW D. BENTON
Assistant Attorney General

Page 3

Mayor R.E. Goldsby, M.D.
Opinion No. 01-109
Page 3

OPINION NUMBER 01-109

Syllabus

90 – B – 4 PUBLIC MEETINGS – State & Local Governing Bodies

LA R.S. 33:361
LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i)

It is statutorily permissible to mandate that notice for special meetings be given sooner than the minimum requirement set forth in LA R.S. 42:7 (b)(i).

The Honorable R.E. Goldsby, M.D.
Mayor of the Town of Amite
212 E. Oak Street
Amite, Louisiana 70422

Date Received: 03-20-01

Date Released: May 17, 2001

Author: Andrew D. Benton
Assistant Attorney General