Could Rayne restrict take-home police vehicles and split an officer's week between paid and volunteer hours?

Plain-English summary

Rayne's police chief asked whether the town could restrict his take-home police vehicle and whether an officer could be paid for part of a forty-hour week while volunteering the rest. The 2013 opinion gave two different answers. The board of aldermen could regulate personal use of municipal vehicles, but its ordinance could not interfere with the chief's authority to assign vehicles for law-enforcement work. The AG said an on-call officer's travel between home and work in a police vehicle was not personal use.

For the split hours, the AG found no Louisiana-law prohibition on an officer volunteering part of the week and being paid for the rest. It expressly declined to decide federal Fair Labor Standards Act compliance. It quoted federal regulations against performing volunteer services of the same type for the same public employer and warned of possible minimum-wage or overtime consequences even with the employee's consent.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2013. 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.

Historical summary

Chief and board of aldermen

The opinion distinguished official, on-call vehicle use from personal use. The board could limit the latter but could not negate the chief's inherent operational authority over department vehicles.

Police officers and payroll staff

The AG's state-law answer did not resolve federal wage obligations. It also noted that a volunteer officer had to be properly commissioned and that forgone pay might affect benefits.

Common questions

Was an on-call officer's drive home in an assigned police car personal use?

The AG said no. It treated that travel as connected to the officer's on-call status and the chief's official vehicle assignment.

Could the board ban every take-home police-car use?

The opinion said a personal-use ordinance could not interfere with the chief's inherent authority to assign vehicles for official law-enforcement work.

Did the AG say a paid officer could volunteer unpaid hours for the same city without federal wage issues?

No. It found no state-law bar to the proposed arrangement but declined the federal question and identified regulations that might make the arrangement problematic under federal wage law.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion applied the Lawrason Act chief's responsibilities under La. R.S. 33:423 and discussed La. R.S. 33:2211's limited municipal population coverage. It quoted 29 C.F.R. § 553.102(a) and § 553.101(d) when describing unresolved federal wage concerns. The available scan extract does not preserve a legible full issue date, so the date field is blank.

Citations

• La. R.S. 33:423: chief-of-police duties identified in the opinion.
• La. R.S. 33:2211: state wage provision the AG found inapplicable to Rayne's population.
• 29 C.F.R. § 553.102(a) and § 553.101(d): federal volunteer-service rules the AG identified but did not decide.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/13-0052

Original opinion text

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

~htt£ of 1fiouishnnt
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. BOX 94005
BATON ROUGE
70804-9005
JAMES D. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
ATTORNEY GENERAL

J N 2 2013
OPINION 13-0052
77 OFFICERS - Local & Municipal
La. R.S. 33:423
La. R.S. 33:2211
Mr. Carroll Stelly
It is permissible for the board of aldermen of a Lawrason Act municipality to
Chief of Police, City of Rayne
pass an ordinance regulating the personal use of vehicles owned by the
Post Office Box 69
municipality; however, such an ordinance must not interfere with the inherent
authority of the chief of police as set forth under the provisions of the Lawrason
Rayne, Louis!ana 70578
Act and must recognize that an officer who is "on call" and uses his police
vehicle to travel to and from home is not using the vehicle for personal use.
Under state law, a police officer in the City of Rayne may voluntarily elect to be paid for twenty hours per week and volunteer for the other twenty hours per
Dear Chief Stelly: week without pay. but the City should consider whether federal wage and hour
laws miQht be implicated by such an arranQement.

As Chief of Police for the City of Rayne ("City"), a municipality governed by the provisions of the Lawrason Act, La. R.S. 33:321-463, you have requested an opinion of this office regarding the use of City owned vehicles by police officers and regarding whether an officer may choose to work twenty hours per week without pay.

More specifically, your first question asks whether the mayor and board of aldermen may pass an ordinance that "prevents a police chief who is on call 24 hours a day from using his take home unit." Our office has several previous opinions regarding the ability of a board of alderman operating under the Lawrason Act to regulate the use of vehicles by the police department, examining whether such a regulation infringes upon the inherent authority of the chief of police to manage the police department. 1

In La. Atty. G.en. Op. No. 07-0165, our office stated the Town of Welsh could enact an ordinance to restrict the use of police vehicles to official business, but must recognize that those offk:ers who are designated as "on call" and using the vehicle to travel to and from home a,:e not using the vehicle for personal use. See also La. Atty. Gen. Op. No.
05-0224. This office reached the same conclusion in La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 00-504 (opining that "interference with the inherent authority of the Chief of Police would arise if the ordinance is applied to negate the instruction of the Chief of Police where he has authorized the use of police vehicles to and from work for those officers who are 'on call'

1 La. R.S. 33:42::!(A) sets forth the duties of a chief of police in a Lawrason Act municipality and provides:
"The marshal snail be the chief of police and shall be ex officio a constable. He shall have general responsibility fer' law enforcement in the municipality, and shall be charged with the enforcement of all ordinances within the IT'unicipality and all applicable state laws." This office has long recognized that an elected chief of police has the inherent power and authority to supervise and direct his office, equipment, and personnel 0'1 a day-to-day basis and to assign its personnel and equipment. See La. Atty. Gen. Op.
Nos. 09-0013, 02-56, 02-39, and 98-460.

Page 2

Carroll Stelly
Opinion 13-0052
Page -2­

status"); La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 99-27 (opining that the chief of police is authorized to assign himself and his personnel a vehicle for use in twenty-four hour tours of duty). Similarly, in Atty. Gen. Op. 00-389, this office stated, "[ilt is an established principle that the mayor and alderman may not revoke the "inherent powers" of an elected Chief of Police of a Lawrason Act municipality to operate, control and administer police department personnel. This inherent authority, however, applies only to the official law enforcement use of municipal police vehicles." See also La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 80-1280 (the chief of police has the inherent authority to control police vehicles, which includes the authority to assign a police department vehicle to himself for police work, however, such vehicle may not be used for personal use unless such has been authorized by the mayor and board of aldermen); and La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 02-77 (an ordinance may regulate the personal use of a municipal vehicle by police officers).

Based upon the opinions cited above, it remains the opinion of this office that it is permissible for the board of aldermen of a Lawrason Act municipality to pass an ordinance regulating the personal use of vehicles owned by the municipality; however, such an ordinance must not interfere with the inherent authority of the chief of police to operate the police department and allocate its resources and personnel as set forth under the provisions of the Lawrason Act and must recognize that an officer who is on call and uses his police vehicle to travel to and from home is not using the vehicle for personal use.

Your second question asks whether it is permissible for a reserve officer who is scheduled to work forty hours per week to agree to be paid for twenty of those hours and volunteer for the other twenty hours without pay. Our research has revealed nothing which would prohibit an officer from voluntarily electing to be paid for twenty hours per week and volunteering for the other twenty hours per week. See La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 11-0029 (opining "our research reflects nothing in the law which would prohibit volunteer police assistance for the Village of Natchez").2 La. R.S. 33:2211 defines an "employee of a police department" for purposes of minimum wages and maximum working hours, but only applies to municipalities having a population of not less than twelve thousand nor more than two hundred fifty thousand. Therefore, La. R.S. 33:2211, et seq. is inapplicable to the City of Rayne, which has a population of approximately 8,000. As noted in La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 11-0029, we remind you that a volunteer police officer must be properly commissioned to perform the duties of a police officer.

While it is the policy of this office to decline to give opinions on the application of federal law, be advised that there may be some effects of the split paid/volunteer arrangement that you reference that might have implications under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. The FLSA contains the minimum wage and

2 Please note that the employee choosing to forego payment and serve as a volunteer should be made aware of how this may affect his other benefits, inclUding but not limited to, insurance and eligibility in the applicable retirement system.

Page 3

Carroll Stelly
Opinion 13-0052
Page -3­

maximum hour (overtime) requirements of federal law. For compliance purposes, the Department of Labor has issued regulations providing that a public employee may not "perform volunteer services for a public agency when such hours involve the same type of services which the individual is employed to perform for the same public agency." 29 C.F.R. § 553.102(a). Similarly, under these regulations, a person "shall not be considered a volunteer if the individual is otherwise employed by the same public agency to perform the same types of services as those for which the individual proposes to volunteer." 29 C.F.R. § 553.101(d). Depending on the nature of the work to be performed and considering that the wages would be paid for only part of the time worked, there may be a minimum wage (or overtime wage) issue if paid and unpaid hours worked are considered to arrive at an effective hourly rate of pay, regardless of the employee's consent to the arrangement. We suggest that you consult with local counselor seek an advisory opinion from the U.S. Department of Labor to address this concern.

We trust this adequately responds to your request. However, if our office can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours very truly,

JAMES D. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
Attorney General

By: ~H~
INDSEYK\H UNTER
Assistant Attorney General
JDC/LKH/chb