Could a Louisiana village reduce a water bill after a customer's pipe broke beyond the meter?

Plain-English summary

In 2015, the Louisiana Attorney General concluded that the Village of Cankton could not reduce a resident's water bill because a pipe broke on the customer's side of the meter. The request said the village was not responsible for the break. The AG treated a downward adjustment without village error as forgiveness of a public debt prohibited by La. Const. art. VII, sec. 14(A).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2015. 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

Q: Did a customer's leak justify reducing the water bill? A: The AG said no for a break on the customer side of the meter when the village had made no error.

Q: Did it matter that the village did not cause the break? A: Yes. The request said the village was not responsible, and the AG's conclusion specifically assumed no village error.

Q: What constitutional rule did the AG apply?
A: The AG said forgiving the amount owed would be a prohibited donation of public funds.

Background and statutory framework

The AG applied its prior opinions on forgiveness of water bills and other debts owed to public entities. The holding was expressly tied to the absence of an error by the village; the opinion did not decide a billing-error dispute.

Citations and references

• La. Const. art. VII, sec. 14(A).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/15-0057

Original opinion text

J$ltnte of 1!ioulslnun
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. BOX 94005
BATON ROUGE
JAMES D. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
70804-9005
ATTORNEY GENERAL

July 17, 2015
OPINION 15-0057

90-A-1 PUBLIC FUNDS & CONTRACTS
The Honorable Kevin Colligan
La. Const. art. VII, Sec. 14
Mayor
The Village of Cankton may not reduce, set aside or adjust
Village of Cankton
downwards a resident's utility bill absent any error on the
part of the Village.
107 Dandurand Street
Cankton, LA 70584

Dear Mayor Colligan,

Your request for an Attorney General's Opinion has been assigned to me for research and reply. On behalf of the Village of Cankton ("Village"), you have asked for our opinion as to whether the Village may adjust a citizen's water bill due to a broken pipe on the customer's side of the meter. Your request states the Village was not responsible for the break in the pipe.

The question presented must be addressed in light of La. Const. art. VII, sec. 1, which provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

Section 14(A) Prohibited Uses. Except as otherwise provided by this constitution, the funds, credit, property, or things of value of the state or of any political subdivision shall not be loaned, pledged, or donated to or for any person, association, or corporation, public or private.

The Louisiana Supreme Court has determined that this constitutional proviston "is violated when public funds or property are gratuitously alienated." Board of Directors of the Industrial Development Board of the City of Gonzales, Louisiana, Inc. v. All Taxpayers, Property Owners, Citizens of the City of Gonzales, (La. 9/6/06), 938 So. 2d 11, 20 (the "Cabela's" case).

Our office has further interpreted Cabela's to say that in order to comply with La. Const. art. VII, sec. 14(A), a public entity has no authority to set-aside, reduce, or otherwise forgive a debt owed to the public entity. See La. Atty. Gen. Op. Nos. 13-0192, 13-0079, 10-0287 and 10-0264.

Page 2

Mayor Kevin Colligan
Opinion 15-0057
Page 2

Recently, in La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 14-0055, our office addressed a similar issue regarding the ability of Water Works District #2 of St. Tammany Parish to forgive or set­ aside a customer's water bill due to leaks on the customer's side of the meter. The opinion concluded that, pursuant to La. Const. art. VII, sec. 14(A), the District may not reduce, set aside or adjust downwards a particular resident's utility bill absent any error on the part of the District. The same conclusion has consistently been reached by this office. See, e.g. La. Atty. Gen. Op, Nos. 97-0425, 99-0375, 01-0316, 03-0155, 11-0187, 12-0023, and 13-0079.

In accord with the prior opinions of this office, it is our opinion that the Village may not reduce, set aside or adjust downwards a resident's utility bill absent an error on the part of the Village. To do so would violate La. Const. art. VII, sec. 14(A).

We hope this sufficiently answers your inquiry; however, if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

Yours very truly,

JAMES D. "BUDDY" CALDWELL
Attorney General

By: {ItIIY;jf)t2r/rM-­
A~DR~L. ~ifffC+---
Assistant Attorney General