Could Louisiana fund sex-offender registry appropriations when the named bill never passed?

Plain-English summary

Louisiana's 2006 appropriations bill set aside $185,000 and $1 million from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund, contingent on House Bill 695 becoming law. That bill did not pass. The State Treasurer's counsel asked whether Treasury could still pay the appropriations. The Attorney General answered yes, because a separate law, Act 663, allowed payment if the relevant provisions of the reengrossed House Bill 695 became law in any legislative instrument.

The AG said those provisions were enacted in Act 663 itself. Thus the original bill-specific condition failed, but Act 663's separate condition was met. The opinion treated the two acts as reconcilable and concluded Treasury should fund the appropriations. It did not say House Bill 695 itself was enacted.

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

Why was payment in doubt?

House Bill No. 1 made the two appropriations contingent on enactment of House Bill 695, but the Legislature did not enact that bill.

What changed the result?

Act 663 said payment could occur if the provisions in the reengrossed version of House Bill 695 were enacted, regardless of the instrument carrying them. The AG said Act 663 contained those provisions.

Did the AG treat the two laws as conflicting?

It said their apparent conflict could be reconciled: the original contingency failed, while Act 663 supplied another condition that had been fulfilled.

How much funding did the request identify?

It identified one appropriation of $185,000 for additional support and another of $1 million for the Operational Support Program's distribution to parish sheriffs.

Background and statutory framework

House Bill No. 1 became Act 17 of the 2006 session and conditioned the two dedicated-fund appropriations on House Bill 695. Senate Bill 612 became Act No. 663 and provided the alternate condition the AG applied. The opinion concluded that the reengrossed bill's relevant provisions had been enacted in Act 663, making the appropriations payable.

Citations

• House Bill No. 1 (Act 17, the appropriations bill).
• Act No. 663 (alternate payment condition and enacted provisions).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/06-0187

Original opinion text

November 15, 2006
OPINION NUMBER 06-0187

Mr. James H. Napper, II
3 APPROPRIATIONS
Executive Counsel
The appropriations from the Sex Offender Registry
Treasurer of the State of Louisiana
Technology Fund contained in House Bill No. 1
P.O. Box 44154
should be funded by the Treasury pursuant to Act
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804
663 of the 2006 Regular Session.

Dear Mr. Napper:

You requested an Attorney General’s opinion regarding two specific appropriations from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund. You indicate that on Lines 27 through 32 of Page 88 of House Bill No. 11, under Schedule 08-415, an appropriation of $185,000 is made in the following provisions thereof, to-wit:

Payable out of the State General Fund by Statutory Dedications out of the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund for additional support, in the event that House Bill No. 695 of the 2006 Regular Session of the Legislature is enacted into law. (Emphasis added)

On Lines 52 through 59 of Page 92 of House Bill No. 1 under Schedule 08-419, an appropriation of $1,000,000 is made in the following provisions thereof, to-wit:

Payable out of the State General Fund by Statutory Dedications out of the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund to the Operational Support Program, for distribution to the sheriff of each parish in accordance with C.C.P. Art. 895.1(F) in the event that House Bill No. 695 of the 2006 Regular Session of the Legislature is enacted into law. (Emphasis added)

House Bill No. 695 of the 2006 Regular Session was not enacted into law by the Legislature.

However, Senate Bill No. 612 of the 2006 Regular Session, which was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor into law as Act No. 663, effective June 29, 2006, as to Sections 4 and 5 thereof, contains the following provisions in Section 5 thereof, to-wit:

1
House Bill No. 1 was passed by the Legislature and was signed by the Governor into law as Act No. 17, effective as of July 1, 2006.

Page 2

Mr. James H. Napper, II
Opinion Number 06-0187
Page -2-

Section 6. The funds payable out of the State General Fund by Statutory Dedications out of the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund for additional support and the Operational Support Program for distribution to the sheriff of each parish in accordance with C.C.P. Art. 895.1(F), as appropriated in Schedule 08-419, Office of State Police, Public Safety Services, of House Bill No. 1 of the 2006 Regular Session of the Legislature contingent upon the enactment of House Bill No. 695 of the 2006 Regular Session [sic] Legislature, shall be payable as so appropriated if the provisions contained in the reengrossed version of House Bill No. 695 are enacted into law regardless of the instrument in which such provisions are enacted. (Emphasis added)

The “… provisions contained in the reengrossed version of House Bill No. 695 …” are contained in Section 4 of Act No. 663, effective as previously mentioned on June 29, 2006, and therefore apparently have been enacted into law.

You question the validity and effectiveness of the two above identified specific appropriations from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund contained in House Bill No. 1, and whether they should be funded by the Treasury despite the contingency provisions thereof, in view of the above-stated factual situations regarding House Bill No. 695, the Act 663 and any other applicable, relevant facts or law.

House Bill 1 (Act 17) and Act No. 663 both contain specific provisions regarding the subject, the appropriation from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund. While these two Acts appear to be in conflict, the conflict is not non-reconcilable. Act 17 provides for a conditional appropriation; the condition being that House Bill No. 695 of the 2006 Regular Session of the Legislature be enacted into law. That condition was not met. However, the failure of that condition does not prohibit the appropriation from ever being paid. It simply means the appropriation is not payable based upon that particular condition. Act 663 provided for a separate condition under which the same appropriation could be paid. As we indicated, “… provisions contained in the reengrossed version of House Bill No. 695 …” have been enacted into law. Thus, the condition contained in Act 663 has been met. Therefore, it is the opinion of our office that the specific appropriations from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund contained in House Bill No. 1 should be funded by the Treasury.

Page 3

Mr. James H. Napper, II
Opinion Number 06-0187
Page -3-

Trusting this adequately responds to your request, we remain

Yours very truly,

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: _________
KENNETH L. ROCHE, III
Assistant Attorney General

CCF, JR/KLR, III/crt

Page 4

Opinion Number 06-0187

3 APPROPRIATIONS

The appropriations from the Sex Offender Registry Technology Fund contained in House Bill No. 1 should be funded by the Treasury pursuant to Act 663 of the 2006 Regular Session.

Mr. James H. Napper, II
Executive Counsel
Treasurer of the State of Louisiana
P.O. Box 44154
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804

Date Received:

Date Released: November 15, 2006

Kenneth L. Roche, III
Assistant Attorney General