Could new southeast Louisiana flood authorities retain levee district police after the reorganization?

Short answer The AG said a flood protection authority's board could retain police security personnel on behalf of a levee district within its territory, but the authority could not directly employ them for itself. A levee district could not keep police independently of its new board's approval.
State
Louisiana
Opinion
La. Atty. Gen. Op. 06-0129
Issued
May 24, 2006
Issued by
Office of the Louisiana Attorney General
Requested by
Walter J. Boasso, Louisiana State Senator, District 1

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2006. Ask about yours and see what current Louisiana law means for your facts, with citations you can check.

Disclaimer: This is an official Louisiana Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are advisory; they inform Louisiana officials but are not binding precedent like a court ruling. This summary is informational and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Louisiana attorney before relying on the opinion for a specific situation.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as an official web page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (official page)

Plain-English summary

As Louisiana prepared to replace southeast levee boards with flood protection authority boards, a senator asked whether existing levee district police could stay. The AG drew a distinction: an authority board could retain police on behalf of a levee district within its jurisdiction, but the authority could not employ police security personnel directly on its own behalf. The answer was tied to the reorganization statutes, which the opinion said would take effect if the required constitutional amendment was adopted.

A district under an authority could not continue a police force against its authority board's decision, because it would act through that board. The AG also said the board could arrange for one district's police to serve another district through a qualifying cooperative agreement. It did not decide whether particular workers were owed layoff notice; that depended on facts and applicable civil service rules.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2006. 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 new authority retain an existing levee police force?

The AG said yes at the authority board's discretion, if the officers were employed on behalf of a levee district within its territory. It read the bar on direct authority employment as distinct from employing personnel for a constituent district.

Could a levee district keep the officers after its authority board discontinued them?

No. Under the contemplated reorganization, the authority board replaced the district board, so the district could act only through the authority board.

Could officers from one district patrol another district's levees?

The AG said the authority board could enter a cooperative agreement for that arrangement on behalf of the districts. The agreement still had to meet the constitutional public-expenditure requirements stated in the opinion.

Did the AG promise laid-off officers advance notice?

No. It said notice entitlement was a factual question outside its decision. For classified civil service employees, the authority board had to follow applicable Civil Service Rules, which the opinion described as generally requiring layoff notices and a plan.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read the authority board's inherited levee-district powers together with R.S.38:330.7's prohibition on direct authority employment of police. R.S. 38:330.2(B) allowed contracts on behalf of districts, and R.S. 38:330.5 governed employees' civil service status. The AG's analysis was expressly conditional on the constitutional amendment and January 2007 transition described in the opinion.

Citations

  • R.S. 38:326 and R.S.38:330.7 (district police authority and restriction on direct authority employment).
  • R.S. 38:330.2(B) (authority board contracts on behalf of levee districts).
  • R.S. 38:330.5 (employee civil service status).

Source

Original opinion text

May 24, 2006
Opinion Number 06-0129

R.S. 38:281 et seq.; R.S. 38:326
R.S. 38:330.1; R.S. 38:33.1(A)
R.S. 38:330.1(A); R.S. 38:330.1(C) (1)
R.S. 38:330.2(A); R.S. 38:330.2(B)
Honorable Walter J. Boasso
R.S. 38:330.5; R.S. 38:330.7
Louisiana State Senator, District 1
100 Intermodal Drive Summary: Flood Protection Authorities may, at their
Chalmette, LA 70043
discretion, retain existing police security personnel on behalf
of levee districts within their territorial jurisdiction.

Dear Senator Boasso:

We have received your request for an Attorney General’s opinion regarding the effects of the newly created Southeast La. Flood Protection Authorities on existing levee district police security personnel. The statutes creating the Authorities will become effective on January 1, 2007, if the required constitutional amendment is adopted.1

Background: Act 1 of the 2006 1st Extraordinary Session enacted R.S. 38:330.1 et seq., Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authorities (“SLFPA”).2 R.S. 38:33.1(A) created the SLFPA-East and the SLFPA-WestBank (hereinafter referred to as “Flood Protection Authorities” or “Authorities”). These Authorities were created to exercise authority over, and have management, oversight and control of, the levee districts within their territorial jurisdictions3 and are governed by Boards of Commissioners (“Authority Boards”).4 The Authority Board will replace the existing board of commissioners of the levee districts within its territorial jurisdiction.5 The Authority Board will have the same authority as the prior levee board had, under current law, as well as any additional authorizations or restrictions included in the above-referenced enabling legislation. With this in mind, we will now address your questions.

Question 1: Do Flood Protection Authorities have the power or authority to retain existing levee district police forces?

It is our opinion that a Flood Protection Authority may, at the discretion of its Board of Commissioners, retain existing police security personnel on behalf of a levee district

1
See Act 43 of 2006 First Extraordinary Session of La. Legislature. 2 Title 38, Chapter 4, Levee Districts, Part III-A. 3 R.S. 38:330.1(A). 4 R.S. 38:330.1(C)(1) 5 R.S. 38:330.2(A)


Page 2

Opinion Number 06-0129
Honorable Walter J. Boasso
Louisiana State Senator, District 1
Page -2-

within its territorial jurisdiction. However, a Flood Protection Authority may not directly employ police security personnel on their own behalf, as will be discussed below. Flood Protection Authorities are levee districts.6 Therefore, an Authority Board is authorized by R.S.38:326, at its discretion, to employ levee district police officers. However, the Authority Boards are also subject to R.S.38:330.7, which prohibits an Authority Board from directly employing police security personnel, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

§330.7 Police officers
Each authority shall not directly employ police security personnel.
However, the authority may enter into cooperative endeavor agreements with appropriate local law enforcement agencies or local governmental subdivisions to provide necessary police security services for levees or the authority may assume the rights and responsibilities of any existing cooperative endeavor agreements for police security services.

While an Authority Board may not directly employ police officers on its own behalf, it is not prohibited from employing police security personnel on behalf of a levee district within its jurisdiction.7 Thus Authority Boards may, at their discretion, retain existing police security personnel on behalf of levee districts within their territorial jurisdiction.

(2) If a Flood Protection Authority decides to discontinue employing existing police security personnel, may the levee district continue to employ them?

No. Levee districts within the territorial jurisdiction of a Flood Protection Authority may not continue to employ police security personnel without the approval of the Authority Board. Effective Jan. 1, 2007,8 the Authority Board replaces the levee board in all levee districts within the Authority’s territorial jurisdiction. Thereafter, those levee districts may act only through the Authority Board.

(3) If an existing levee district police department is disbanded by a Flood Protection Authority, will the personnel be given sufficient notice to seek other employment?

A determination as to whether a group of employees is entitled to notice prior to termination or layoff is a question of fact which our office is not in the position to make. However, if any of these employees are in the state classified civil service, the Flood Protection Authority Board will be required to comply with all applicable Civil Service Rules. We note the following for your reference.

6
R.S. 38:330.1(A)
7
It also allows an Authority to enter into a cooperative endeavor to obtain police security services on its own behalf, but only with local law enforcement agencies or other local governmental subdivisions. 8 If proposed constitutional amendment is adopted. See Footnote No. 1.


Page 3

Opinion Number 06-0129
Honorable Walter J. Boasso
Louisiana State Senator, District 1
Page -3-

R.S. 38:330.5 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

§330.5. Employees
A. An authority may employ such employees as it deems necessary for its proper functioning. All employees of the authority and each levee district within the territorial jurisdiction of the authority shall be considered civil service employees for the purpose of Article X of the Constitution of Louisiana. Each employee of a levee district within the territorial jurisdiction of the authority who is in the unclassified civil service on December 31, 2006 shall remain in the unclassified civil service as long as the employee remains in the same position.

Classified state civil service employees are governed by Article 10 of the La. Constitution. More specifically, layoffs are addressed in Art. 10, Section 48(A)(3).9 In general, these rules require the posting of a general notice of layoff, the submission of a layoff plan to the Department of Civil Service and the provision of notice to each affected employee. For information regarding these notice provisions and other rights of state classified civil service employees, we suggest you contact the La. Department of Civil Service.

(4) If a Flood Protection Authority continues to employ police security personnel on behalf of a levee district within its jurisdiction, can the levee district enter into a cooperative endeavor with another levee district that does not have a police force, to patrol levees in the other district?

As stated above, a levee district can only act through its board. Effective January 1, 2007,10 levee districts within the territorial jurisdiction of a Flood Protection Authority will be governed by its Authority Board.

R.S. 38:330.2(B) authorizes an Authority Board to enter into contracts and agreements of any nature on behalf of levee districts within its territorial jurisdiction. These contracts may be with persons, entities and instrumentalities of any kind necessary to carry out the purposes of the levee districts. We noted above that an Authority Board cannot directly employ police personnel, but it can employ them on behalf of a levee district within its jurisdiction. Thus an Authority Board may, at its discretion, enter into a cooperative endeavor on behalf of a levee district that has existing police security personnel to provide such services to another levee district that does not have security

9
See also Chapter 17 of the Civil Service Rules which governs layoffs of classified civil service employees. These Rules can be found on the Dept. of State Civil Service Website at www.dscs.state.la.us. 10 If the constitutional amendment proposed in Act 43 of the 2006 First Extraordinary Session is adopted.


Page 4

Opinion Number 06-0129
Honorable Walter J. Boasso
Louisiana State Senator, District 1
Page -4-

personnel. All requirements for a constitutionally-sanctioned cooperative endeavor must still be met.11

We trust this adequately addresses your request. If you have additional questions, please contact our office.

Yours very truly,

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: _________
DENISE BROU FITZGERALD
Assistant Attorney General
CCF, jr./DBF/dam

11
See Atty. Gen. Op. Nos. 05-122, 04-112, 93-787, 93-164, and 92-722 for the three requirements of a constitutionally sanctioned cooperative endeavor. (1) The entity must have a legal obligation to expend public funds; 2) The agreement must be for a public purpose; and 3) The cost must be proportionate to the public benefit.


Page 5

Opinion Number 06-0129
Syllabus

R.S. 38:281 et seq.
R.S. 38:326
R.S. 38:330.1
R.S. 38:33.1(A)
R.S. 38:330.1(A)
R.S. 38:330.1(C) (1)
R.S. 38:330.2(A)
R.S. 38:330.2(B)
R.S. 38:330.5
R.S. 38:330.7

Summary: Flood Protection Authorities may, at their discretion, retain existing police security personnel on behalf of levee districts within their territorial jurisdiction.

Honorable Walter J. Boasso
Louisiana State Senator, District 1
100 Intermodal Drive
Chalmette, LA 70043

Date Received:

Date Released: May 24, 2006

Denise Brou Fitzgerald
Assistant Attorney General

What does Louisiana law say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2006. Ezel checks the current Louisiana statutes and case law, applies them to your situation, and cites what it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace