Could Cameron Parish use its courthouse-and-jail tax to operate nearby annex buildings?

Plain-English summary

Cameron Parish had used a courthouse-and-jail property tax to maintain and operate annexes and temporary offices after storm damage. The 2013 opinion said the voter-approved proposition authorized only maintenance and operation of the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail. The AG concluded that buildings housing other parish offices, including the East and West Annexes and temporary site described in the request, were outside that dedication.

The opinion distinguished an earlier AG opinion about buying an adjacent office building under a different proposition. That earlier tax authorized "improving" a courthouse; Cameron's proposition authorized only maintaining and operating it.

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

Parish finance officials

The AG treated the ballot proposition's specific words as controlling and concluded that the renewed tax covered only the courthouse and jail.

Cameron taxpayers

The opinion read the dedication as tied to the actual courthouse and jail buildings. It defined a courthouse as the building where judges administer justice and a jail as the local detention center.

Common questions

Could the tax pay East or West Annex operating costs?

The AG said no. Those buildings were not the courthouse or jail named in the proposition.

Could it cover temporary parish offices used after Hurricane Rita?

The opinion answered that with the annex questions and concluded the tax could only maintain and operate the actual courthouse and jail.

Why did another parish get to buy an adjacent office with courthouse-tax money?

The AG said that earlier proposition also authorized "improving" the courthouse, and buying an adjacent building alleviated overcrowding. Cameron's proposition lacked that word.

Background and statutory framework

Voters approved a proposition dedicating the ad valorem tax to "maintaining and operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail." The opinion cited La. R.S. 39:704's rule that special-tax money is used only for approved purposes and read the proposition strictly. The available scan extract does not resolve the full date in its letterhead, so the issue-date metadata remains blank.

Citations

• La. R.S. 39:704: exclusive-use rule for special-tax proceeds.
• Atty. Gen. Op. No. 08-0033: earlier opinion distinguished by its different ballot language.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/13-0059

Original opinion text

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

~tat.e of 1fi.ouisiaua
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. BOX 94005
BATON ROUGE
70804-9005
JAMES D. "BUDDY" CALDWEll
ATIORNEY GENERAL

AUG J 3 2013
OPINION 13-0059
150 - TAXATION
La. Const. art. VI. § 26; La. R.S. 39:704
The Honorable Cecil R. Sanner
Ad valorem lax proceeds dedicated "for the purpose of maintaining and
District Attorney
operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail," may not be used to
maintain and operate buildings other than those that house the court Thirty-Eighth Judicial District and jail.
Post Office Drawer 280
Cameron, Louisiana 70631

Dear Mr. Sanner:

Your request for an Attorney General's Opinion regarding the use of certain tax proceeds has been assigned to me for research and reply.

You indicate that, on May 4, 2013, the voters of the Parish of Cameron (the "Parish") renewed the ad valorem tax contained in the following proposition:

Shall the Parish of Cameron, be authorized to levy a tax of two and sixty­ four hundredth (2.64) mills on the dollar of the assessed valuation on all property subject to taxation in said Parish (an estimated $739,631.01 is reasonably expected to be collected from the levy of this tax per annum), for a period of ten (10) years commencing with the year 2014, for the purpose of maintaining and operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail?

Further, you indicate as follows:

The office of the Cameron Parish Police Jury was situated in the Cameron Courthouse until 1967 when a building was constructed on the east side of the Courthouse and was referred to as the "Police Jury Annex." The maintenance and operational expenses of this Annex were paid out of the courthouse and jail ad valorem tax.

The District Attorney's office was located in a building (owned by Cameron Parish) next to the Courthouse until 2010 when a new building was constructed to house the D.A. and the Tax Assessor. The current

Page 2

The Honorable Cecil R. Sanner
Opinion 13-0059
Page -2­

maintenance and operational expenses of this "East Annex" are also paid out of the courthouse and jail ad valorem tax.

Prior to Hurricane Rita in 2005, the Cameron courthouse housed the District Judge, Clerk of Court, Sheriffs Office, Registrar of Voters, Tax Assessor and the Civil Defense office.

Hurricane Rita destroyed the Police Jury Annex. Thereafter, from 2005 to 2012, the Police Jury, its Administrator and staff, the Registrar of Voters and the Director of Planning and Development, and their employees, were housed in a temporary location at Creole, Louisiana. The Sheriffs investigators and the Office of Emergency Preparedness were temporarily located in a building behind the courthouse. The courthouse and jail tax was used to fund the maintenance and operational expenses at these temporary sites.

In 2012 the Cameron Parish Police Jury moved from its temporary site in Creole to a new facility ("West Annex") adjacent to the Courthouse. This facility also houses the West Cameron Port Commission, the Registrar of Voters and the OEP. The current maintenance and operational expenses of this new building .are also paid from the courthouse and jail ad valorem tax.

Considering the past use of these tax proceeds, you ask the following questions:

1. May the Cameron Parish Police Jury use these tax monies for the purpose of maintaining and operating the building ("East Annex") which currently houses the District Attorney and the Tax Assessor?

2. May the Cameron Parish Police Jury use these tax monies for the purpose of maintaining and operating the building ("West Annex") which houses the Parish Administrator and staff, the West Cameron Port Commission, the Registrar of Voters and the Office of Emergency Preparedness?

3. Was the Cameron Parish Police Jury authorized to use the courthouse and jail tax monies for the maintenance and operation of its temporary location in Creole that housed the Parish administrator and staff, the Registrar of Voters, the Director of Planning and Development, and the Office of Emergency Preparedness from 2005 to 2012?

Because all of your questions involve the use of tax proceeds for operating and maintaining buildings other than the actual courthouse and jail, this office will answer them in globo.

Page 3

The Honorable Cecil R. Sanner
Opinion 13-0059
Page -3­

Local governments may impose taxes only when the power to do so has been granted to them by the state constitution or by statute. 1 Article VI, § 26(8) of the Louisiana Constitution grants the governing authority of a parish the authority to levy a millage increase for other than general purposes, if approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon in an election held for that purpose. The proposition must state the specific purpose or purposes for which the tax is to be levied and the length of time the tax is to remain in effect. Significantly, all proceeds of the tax must be used solely for the purpose or purposes set for in the proposition.

Moreover, Louisiana law provides that the proceeds of any special tax shall constitute a trust fund to be used exclusively for the objects and purposes for which the tax was levied. 2 Additionally, Louisiana jurisprudence provides that special tax authorizations must be strictly construed. 3

Here, the millage increase approved by the voters provided that the proceeds and avails of the tax shall be used "for the purpose of maintaining and operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail." No other use was permitted in the proposition submitted to and approved by the voters. Consequently, the tax proceeds at issue can only be used for maintaining and operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail.

In order to determine whether the Parish's use of the ad valorem tax proceeds is or was appropriate, we must determine what the voters intended when they approved the proposition dedicating the tax revenues, in part, for the purpose of maintaining and operating the Cameron Parish Courthouse and Jail. The controlling factor in making this determination is the understanding that can reasonably be ascribed to the voting population as a whole. 4 According to Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004), a "courthouse" is defined, in pertinent part, as "the building where the judge or judges convene to adjudicate disputes and administer justice." Further, a "jail" is defined as "a local government's detention center where persons awaiting trial or those convicted of misdemeanors are confined."

In this instance, the terms of the tax proposition specifically provide that the tax proceeds may only be used for the purpose of maintaining and operating the building where the judge or judges convene to adjudicate disputes and administer justice as well as a local government's detention center where persons awaiting trial or those

Denham Springs Economic Development Dist. v. All Taxpayers, 04-1674, p. 7 (La.2/4/05), 894
SO.2d 325, 331; Radiofone, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 93-0962, p. 2 (La.1/14/94), 630 SO.2d 694, 696. 2 La. R.S. 39:704. 3 Police Jury of the Parish of Acadia v. All Taxpayers, et al., 95-145 (La.App. 3 Gir. 3/29/95), 653 SO.2d 94, rehearing denied; Hemler v. Richland Parish School Board, 76 So. 585 (La. 1917); Watkins v. Ouachita Parish School Board, 136 So. 591 (La. 1931); Hodnett v. Monroe City School Board, 277 SO.2d 598 (La.App. 2 Gir. 1972) and Brock v. Sf. James Parish Council, 407 SO.2d 1265 (La.App. 4 Gir. 1981), writ denied. 4 Denham Springs Economic Development Disf., 04-1674 at p. 15, 894 So.2d at 335.

Page 4

The Honorable Cecil R. Sanner
Opinion 13-0059
Page -4­

convicted of misdemeanors are confined. As such, it is the opinion of this office that these ad valorem tax proceeds may be used by the Parish only for those purposes.

Finally, we note that our opinion can be distinguished from that in Atty. Gen. Op. No. 08­ 0033. There, we determined that the LaSalle Parish Police Jury may use tax proceeds to purchase a building adjacent to the LaSalle Parish Courthouse for use as an office for the LaSalle Parish District Attorney's Office.

The tax proposition in Atty. Gen. Op. No. 08-0033 specifically limited the use of proceeds, in part, for the "improving, maintaining, and operating the courthouse." Basically, we determined that by alleviating overcrowding, the courthouse would be improved by the purchase of the adjacent building. Nevertheless, in the current instance, the proposition only allows for maintenance and operation.

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: %,4. ~1iiC
BENJAMIN A. HUXEN II
Assistant Attorney General
JDC/BAH II