Can the remaining recreation-district tax money pay for work at a Livingston park after the district split?

Plain-English summary

Livingston-area voters approved a 15-mill tax in 1998 for acquiring, improving, and maintaining facilities in Recreation District 5. Later renewal votes failed. The parish split the original district into Districts 5 and 7 and allocated remaining tax money between them. The Town of Livingston asked whether the remaining funds could support projects in District 7, including work at Circle Drive Park, whose property description did not label it a park.

The attorney general said the tax money could be used only for projects consistent with the original proposition and the statutory purposes of recreation districts. The absence of a park label in Circle Drive Park's property description did not decide the question. What mattered was whether the proposed use advanced the recreation purposes and the original voter-approved purpose.

The office did not approve a particular Circle Drive Park project. It said whether a specific undertaking met those purposes was a factual determination for a fact finder, not for the attorney general in an opinion.

What this means for you

Recreation district and parish officials

The opinion tied spending of the remaining tax proceeds to the 1998 proposition and recreation-district statutes. It did not treat the district split or the later failed tax votes as changing those spending purposes.

Livingston town officials

The opinion said Circle Drive Park's property-description wording was not determinative. A proposed improvement or maintenance project still had to fit the statutory recreation objects and the original tax proposition; the office did not decide that factual fit for any proposed project.

Taxpayers

The opinion described special-tax proceeds as dedicated to the objects and purposes voters approved. It said a project's location or label alone did not replace the required purpose analysis.

Common questions

Q: Can the leftover recreation tax be spent in District 7 after District 5 was split?
A: The opinion said the funds could support a project or initiative that matched the original tax proposition and recreation-district statutes. It did not approve every District 7 project.

Q: Does Circle Drive Park need to be called a park in its property record to qualify?
A: No. The attorney general said the lack of that designation was not determinative. The proposed use of the property had to meet the original tax purpose and statutory recreation purposes.

Q: Did the attorney general decide whether a particular Circle Drive Park project qualifies?
A: No. The opinion said that was a factual determination for a fact finder and did not make it.

Q: Could the tax money be used for any project that benefits the town?
A: The opinion limited use to the purposes in the original voter-approved proposition and the statutes governing recreation districts, rather than a general town-benefit standard.

Background and statutory framework

After the 1998 tax approval, voters rejected a renewal in 2007 and new propositions for the split districts in 2018. The parish council divided the remaining original-tax funds and later dissolved District 7's inactive board. The town then had to seek parish funding for District 7 projects. The request focused on whether those remaining funds could be used for recreation work on town-owned property.

La. R.S. 33:4562 authorized recreation districts. La. R.S. 33:4563 described their recreational objects, and La. R.S. 33:4566 addressed district facilities and improvements. La. R.S. 39:704 treated special-tax proceeds as a trust fund limited to the purposes for which the tax was levied. The opinion applied those provisions to the original tax proposition and left project-specific facts unresolved.

Citations and references

• La. R.S. 33:4562 (recreation districts)
• La. R.S. 33:4563 (district purposes)
• La. R.S. 33:4566 (facilities and improvements)
• La. R.S. 39:704 (dedicated special-tax proceeds)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/24-0008

Original opinion text

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

STATE OF LOUISIANA
DEPARm’IENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
P.O. Box 94005
BYrON ROUGE, LA
70804-9005

Liz MuRRILL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
July 8, 2024
OPINION 24-0008
129 TAXATION Levy & Assessment (ad valorem taxes)
-

   The Honorable Jonathan “JT” Taylor                         La. Const. art. VL § 26         La. R.S. 33:4562
                            .   .                             La. R.S. 33:4563                La. R.S. 39:704

Mayor, Town of Livingston
La. R.S. 33:4566
PD. Box 430
.
Resources allocated for acquiring, improving, and maintaining a
Livingston, LA 70754
recreational facility within a recreation district may be utilized for
any project or initiative that aligns with the original proposition and the statutory objects and purposes.
Dear Mayor Taylor:

You requested an opinion of this office on behalf of the Town of Livingston (Town) regarding a special ad valorem tax. In 1998, the electorate approved a proposition for a fifteen (15) mills tax on all property subject to taxation in Recreational District 5 for the purpose of acquiring, improving and maintaining recreational facilities for the District.1 The proposition to renew the tax in 2007 was defeated.2

In 2017, the parish council split Recreational District 5 into two separate districts:
Recreational District 5 (District 5) and Recreational District 7 (District 7), which encompasses the entire Town of Livingston. Propositions for both districts were put on the ballot in 2018 and were defeated.3 As a result of the failed 2018 propositions, the parish council passed an ordinance splitting the remaining funds from the original I 5 mills tax between the two districts. At the time, each district was controlled by a five-member board. The District 7 board was dissolved by the parish council in December of 2023, since the board was inactive for 4 years. Now that the board has dissolved, the money is in the control of the parish council. The Town now must go to the parish to request funding for projects within District 7. You would like to know if proceeds from the original tax, if any remain, may be spent on property located within District 7.

Louisiana Revised Statute 33:4562 provides the legal authority for the creation of recreation districts. Louisiana Revised Statute 33:4563 provides that the “objects and purposes of the recreation districts created under R.S. 33:4562 shall be to own and operate playgrounds and other facilities; or generally to engage in activities which would promote recreation and any related activity designed to encourage recreation and promote the general health and [well-being] of youths.” The purpose of a recreation district is defined broadly in statute, enabling funds to be spent to support a wide array of activities and initiatives, including purchasing and acquiring lands, buildings, equipment

1 Election results 7/18/1998. https://voterportal.sos.laqov (last visited 5/23/2024).
2 Election results 10/20/2007. https://voterportal.sos.la.gov (last visited 5/23/2024).
Election results 12/8/2018. https://voterportal.sos.la.gov (last visited 5/23/2024).

Page 2

OPINION 24-0008
Honorable Jonathan “JT” Taylor
Page 2

and other facilities, and for the construction and maintenance thereof. See La. R.S. 33:4566.

Louisiana Constitution Article 6, Section 26(B) grants a parish governing authority the ability to levy a millage increase for other than general purposes, if approved by a majority ofthe electors voting thereon in an election held forthat purpose. The Louisiana Supreme Court has consistently interpreted this article of the constitution to prohibit the use of dedicated and special taxes for purposes other than those for which they were levied. City of New Orleans v. Louisiana Assessors’ Ret. & Relief Fund, 05-2548 (La. I 0/01/07), 986 So.2d I I 4. Significantly, all proceeds of the tax must be used solely for ,

the purpose or purposes set for in the proposition. Id. 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. La. R.S. 39:704.

Thus, resources allocated for a recreation district or recreational facility may be utilized for any project or initiative that aligns with the statutory definitions outlined above and the purpose set forth in the original tax proposition. Whether a specific project or endeavor aligns with the objectives and purposes of a recreation district or acquiring, improving, and maintaining a recreational facility is a factual determination best left to the fact finder. The Office of the Attorney General does not serve as a fact finder in the process of rendering an opinion. La. Atty. Gen. Op. Nos. 18-0054, 16-0076, 08-0012, and 00-466.

Next, you indicated that the Town retains ownership of two parks, Johnny Sartwell Park and Circle Drive Park. Johnny Sartwell Park is designated as a park in its property description filed with the clerk of court, but Circle Drive Park does not have such a designation. You inquired as to whether the original 15 mills tax may be used for recreational purposes at Circle Drive Park since it is not designated as a park in its property description. The presence or absence of a designated park status for Circle Drive Park in its property description is not determinative. The critical factor lies in assessing whether the utilization of the I 5 mills tax for proposed improvements or maintenance of Circle Drive Park aligns with the objectives and purposes delineated in statute and the original proposition. As outlined above, La. R.S. 33:4563 and 33:4566 provide discretion for the utilization of resources within recreation districts to advance recreational activities and bolster the overall health and well-being of the community. Hence, the pivotal consideration hinges on whether the proposed utilization of funds for Circle Drive Park serves to further these statutory aims and aligns with the purposes set forth in the proposition for acquiring, improving, and maintaining recreational facilities.

Considering the foregoing, it is the opinion of this office that resources allocated for acquiring, improving, and maintaining a recreational facility within a recreation district may be utilized for any project or initiative that aligns with the original proposition and the statutory objects and purposes.

Page 3

OPINION 24-0008
Honorable Jonathan “JT” Taylor
Page 3

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

With best regards,

LIZ MURRILL
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY:ó4t1d&
Amanda M. LaGroue
Assistant Attorney General

LM:AML