Could the West Baton Rouge parish president veto a council decision to remove a budget item before adoption?

Plain-English summary

West Baton Rouge Parish's president proposed an operating budget that funded part of a pavilion enclosure at the community center. The council removed that funding by resolution before adopting the final budget ordinance. The president then issued a veto statement aimed at the deletion. In Opinion 03-0062, the Louisiana Attorney General said the statement had no legal effect: the parish's home-rule charter did not authorize a veto of a council amendment that omitted an appropriation before the final budget was adopted.

The AG distinguished the president's actual veto powers under the charter. Once the budget ordinance was adopted, the president could approve it, veto it in full, or veto individual appropriation items included in it. Those powers did not extend to restoring an item the council had removed before adoption. The letter did not decide the effect of the president's separate vetoes of added items.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003. 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.

What the opinion meant at issuance

Parish council members

The opinion treated adding or deleting proposed appropriations by resolution as part of the council's budget process before it enacted the final ordinance. The president's veto power did not reach a deleted item that was absent from that ordinance.

Parish presidents and budget staff

The charter allowed a line-item veto for appropriation items in an adopted operating or capital budget ordinance. The AG said it did not allow a veto of the absence of an appropriation that the council had properly deleted.

Common questions

Q: Could the president restore pavilion funding by vetoing the council's deletion? A: No. The AG said the charter gave no such power, so the veto statement directed at the deletion had no legal effect.

Q: Did the opinion eliminate the president's budget veto entirely? A: No. It described authority to veto an adopted budget ordinance in full or individual appropriation items included in it. The disputed act concerned an item removed before final adoption.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read the West Baton Rouge home-rule charter's budget-submission and veto provisions together. It distinguished the council's resolutions amending a proposed budget from the later ordinance adopting it. The first-page date is damaged in the source extract, so the exact issue date is blank.

Citations and references

Charter provisions in the opinion: West Baton Rouge Parish Home Rule Charter Article III, Section 3-09 and Article II, Sections 2-11 and 2-13.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/03-0062

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

One American Place
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
301 Main Street, Suite 600
C WL O,WS,ON
P.O. Box 94005
BATON ROUGE
TEL.: (225) 342-7013
FAX: (225) 342-2090
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
70804-9005
ATTORNEY GENERAL

APR 11,Z00
Opinion Number 03-0062

71 -1 MUNICIPALITY- Special Charters
77 OFFICERS- Local & Municipal

Mr. Louis W. Delahaye
Home Rule Charter of West Baton Rouge Parish does not
authorize Parish President to veto a resolution of Parish Assistant District Attorney Council that amended the annual operating budget to Eighteenth Judicial District delete a capital improvement item prior to final council
58156 Court St.
adoption of the budget. Veto statement made by Parish
President to resolution passed by the Parish Council
Plaquemine, LA. 70764
amending the budget to delete a capital improvement item
has no legal effect.
Dear Mr. Delahaye:

On behalf of the West Baton Rouge Parish Council you have requested an opinion of the Attorney General as to the effect, if any, of the Parish President’s veto of the Parish Councils’ action deleting a capital improvement item that was part of the original annual operating budget submitted to the council by the president. Included in your request was a copy of the West Baton Rouge Parish Home Rule Charter, copy of veto statement #5 from the Parish President relating to the Councils action to delete funding for the partial enclosure of a pavilion at the West Baton Rouge Community Center in Port Allen, copy of five (5) line item vetoes by the Parish President, copy of the minutes of the December 12, 2002, regular meeting of the West Baton Rouge Parish Council and the January 9, 2003, council resolution requesting the Attorney General Opinion.

West Baton Rouge Parish is a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana operating under a home rule charter form of government. Local governments are authorized to adopt or amend a home rule charter in accordance with the provisions of Article VI, Section 5 of the Louisiana Constitution.

Article III, Section 3-09 of the West Baton Rouge Parish Home Rule Charter sets forth the powers and duties of the Parish President and which includes the duty to prepare and submit the annual operating budget to the parish council. In this case the proposed annual operating budget submitted to the council by the president included the funding for the partial enclosure of a pavilion at the West Baton Rouge community Center in Port Allen.

Article II, Section 2-11 of the Home Rule Charter sets forth the actions of the Parish Council that requires passage of an Ordinance and reads as follows:

A. An act of the council having the force of law shall be by ordinance. An act requiring an ordinance shall include but not be limited to those which:

Page 2

Opinion Number 03-0062
Mr. Louis W. Delahaye
Assistant District Attorney
Eighteenth Judicial District
Page -2-

(4) Adopt the operating budget and capital improvement budget and appropriate funds for the Parish government.
B. All ordinances shall be codified in accordance with Article VI, Section 10 of the constitution.

As required by the Parish Home Rule Charter the proposed annual operating budget was submitted by the Parish President to the Parish Council for consideration. Amendments to the budget are accomplished by the council by the passage of a resolution. Amendments can include the addition or deletion of a proposed appropriation. In this case the Council passed resolutions that added appropriations and passed a resolution that deleted the proposed funding of the pavilion at the Community Center. The Council then passed an ordinance adopting the annual operating budget and presented the ordinance to the president in accordance with Article II, Section 2-13 of the Parish Home Rule Charter.

Article II, Section 2-13 provides as follows:

Every ordinance adopted by the council shall be presented to the president within three (3) days after adoption.
Within 10 days after the president’s receipt of an ordinance the ordinance shall be returned to the clerk of the council with the president’s approval or with the president’s veto .... All ordinances vetoed by the president shall be vetoed in full, except that the president shall have authority to veto individual appropriation items in the ordinances adopting the operating and capital improvement budget and amendments thereto.
Ordinances vetoed by the president shall be submitted to the council by the clerk of the council no later than the next regular meeting held after publication of the veto statement. Should the council vote ... to override the president’s veto of the ordinance by the favorable vote of at least two-thirds of its authorized membership, said ordinance shall be considered finally enacted in accordance with the section on "Ordinances in General" and become law irrespective of the veto by the president.

The Council timely submitted the ordinance adopting the annual operating budget to the President who issued a line item veto of four (4) of the appropriations that were added by the council and issued a veto statement of the Councils’ action deleting the funding of the pavilion at the Community Center.

On December 12, 2002, and in accordance with Article II, Section 2-13(C), the Parish Council held its regular meeting and by a vote of at least two-thirds of the council voted to override the line item veto of the parish president as to three (3) of the added

Page 3

Opinion Number 03-0062
Mr. Louis W. Delahaye
Assistant District Attorney
Eighteenth Judicial District
Page -3-

appropriations and voted to override the veto statement of the Parish President which related to the omission of funding of the pavilion at the Community Center in Port Allen.

Article III, Section 3-09 of the West Baton Rouge Parish Home Rule Charter provides that the Parish President prepare and submit an annual operating budget to the Parish Council. The council may then amend the budget by resolution to add or delete individual appropriation items and then adopt by ordinance a final budget. Article II, Section 2-13 provides that upon return of the ordinance adopting the operating budget the president may either approve the ordinance as submitted, veto the ordinance in its entirety or exercise his authority to veto individual appropriation items that are set forth in the ordinance adopting the operating and capital improvement budget. There is no provision in the home rule charter granting the parish president veto power over the amendments made to the budget by the council that delete appropriation items prior to final adoption. The parish president has no authority under the Parish Home Rule Charter to veto the absence of an appropriation that was properly deleted by the council.

It is therefore the opinion of this office that the November 22, 2002, veto statement made by the parish president to the councils’ action amending the annual operating budget to delete a capital improvement item before final adoption of the budget by ordinance was not authorized by the West Baton Rouge Parish Home Rule Charter and has no legal effect.

We trust that this answers your inquiry.

Very truly yours,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
Attorney General

By:
RICHARD L. McGll~E~--
Assistant Attorney General
RPI/RLM/dam