Could a Louisiana public retirement board spend system funds lobbying the Legislature?

Plain-English summary

House Legislative Services asked whether a state or statewide retirement board could spend retirement-system money to lobby Louisiana lawmakers. In Opinion 03-0087, the Attorney General concluded that the system and its board members could not use system funds to lobby for or against legislation. The ban applied to money administered or controlled by a state entity, even though retirement-system money was not treated as public funds for every purpose.

The opinion drew a line between lobbying and giving lawmakers factual information about pending proposals. It said the latter remained permitted under the cited statute. The AG also distinguished separate lobbyist and state-employee provisions: unpaid board members who were not employed to lobby were outside the lobbyist provisions as described, and board members were not system employees for the employee-specific ban.

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

Retirement-system boards

The AG treated state and statewide systems as state entities covered by the restriction on using controlled funds to lobby. Their funds' separate status under other law did not remove this spending restriction.

Board members and legislative staff

The opinion allowed factual information about a legislative proposal to flow to lawmakers. It said the separate statutory provisions for compensated lobbyists and state employees did not automatically apply to uncompensated board members, while the system-funds restriction still did.

Common questions

Q: Could a retirement board pay for lobbying from its system funds? A: The AG said no for state and statewide systems. He applied R.S. 43:31(D) to funds under a state entity's control.

Q: Could board members explain a pending bill to legislators? A: Yes. The opinion said factual information about a legislative matter could be disseminated, despite the lobbying-spending restriction.

Q: Did the AG treat retirement-system money as ordinary public funds? A: No. He noted that the funds were not considered public funds, but said that distinction did not control the broader wording of the lobbying-spending ban.

Background and statutory framework

The letter quoted R.S. 43:31(D) as barring state entities from spending funds they held or controlled to lobby for or against a matter having the effect of law before the Legislature. It identified an express exception for normal dissemination of factual information. It then addressed R.S. 24:50 and following sections on compensated lobbyists, and R.S. 24:56 on state employees, before reaching its board-specific conclusion. The source date stamp is OCR-damaged, so the exact issue date is left blank.

Citations and references

Authorities in the opinion: R.S. 43:31(D); R.S. 24:56. The letter also cited earlier AG opinions and a retirement-system case in an OCR-damaged footnote; those citation details are left to the official PDF.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/03-0087

Original opinion text

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

D~^RT~ENT O~ ~USnCE
One American Place
301 Main Street, Suite 600
CIVIL DIVISION
P.O. Box 94005
BATON ROUGE
TEL.: (225) 342-7013
FAX: (225) 342-2090
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
70804-9005
ATTORNEY GENERAL

HAY ! 4 2003
OPINION NUMBER 03-0087

92-A-2 RETIREMENT
~R.S. 43:31
Ms. E. Anne Dunn
Division Director
Members of the board of a state or statewide
Governmental Affairs Division
. retirement system may not use system funds to
House Legislative Services
lobby the legislature.
P. O. Box 44486
Baton Rouge, LA 70804-4486

Dear Ms. Dunn:

You requested the opinion of this office concerning whether a state or statewide retirement system board or the members of such a board, may expend system funds to lobby the legislature?

As you noted, R.S. 43:31(D) prohibits any "branch, department, agency, official, employee, or other entity of state government" from expending "funds of, administered by, or under the control of any branch, department, agency, employee, official, or other entity of state government.., to lobby for or against any proposition or matter having the effect of law being considered by the legislature..." (Emphasis added) This statute specifically exempts from its provisions "the normal dissemination of factual information relative to a ... proposition or matter having the effect of law being considered by the legislature..."

While retirement system funds are not considered public funds1, R.S. 43:31(D) does not limit its application to public funds but rather the prohibition applies to the expenditure of "funds of, administered by, or under the control of any branch, department, agency, employee, official, or other entity of state government ..." Under R.S. 43:31, the controlling factor appears to be if the individual is an official, employer or other entity "of state government" using the state entity’s funds to lobby.2 State and statewide retirement systems are executive branch agencies of the state, or at a minimum, entities or instrumentalities of the state,s Accordingly, the prohibition found in R.S. 43:31(D) does

~Louisiana State Retirement System v State, DepL of Justice, 423 So.2d 73 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982), Op.Atty.Gen. Nos. 94-44, 93-676, 86-183.

2Op.Atty.Gen. No. 98-33.

3Op.Atty.Gen. No. 94-44, 93-676.

Page 2

Ms. E. Anne Dunn
OPINION NUMBER 03-0087
Page -2-

apply to the state and statewide retirement systems. However, as authorized by R.S. 43:31(D), the state and statewide systems, and the members of the boards thereof, may disseminate factual information relative to legislation being considered by the legislature.

Moi’eover, it is pertinent to recognize the restrictions of R.S. 24:50, et seq. relative to lobbying before the legislature, and which specifies in R.S. 24:53 that the provisions shall only apply to persons who are "lobbyists" which is defined in R.S. 24:51 as a person employed or who receives compensation to lobby. Consequently, if the board members are not employed to lobby or do not receive compensation to lobby, the provisions of R.S. 24:50, et seq. are inapplicable to such board members.4

As you noted, and we concur, members of the boards of the state and statewide systems are not employees of the retirement systems; accordingly, the provisions of R.S. 24:56 are inapplicable to the members of the boards. R.S. 24:56 prohibits state employees in their official capacity or on behalf of their employer from lobbying for or against any matter intended to have the effect of law pending before the legislature or any committee thereof. However, this statute does not prohibit the dissemination of factual information relative to any such matter.

As stated in Op.Atty.Gen. 99-65, "in order for our democracy to function efficiently and effectively there must be a free flow of information at all levels of government. It is impossible for federal, state and local officials to be responsive to the needs of their constituents by working in a vacuum. Thus, it is not uncommon for public officials to exchange ideas and information through various forms of communication, including wdtten correspondence, telephone conference calls, E-mail and personal audience. Such discourse is essential."

Trusting this adequately responds to your request, we remain

Yours very truly,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
Attorney General

BY
J
S. HESS
t nt Attorney leral

RPI/MSH

4See Op.Atty.Gen. 99-33.