Could LaSalle Parish use a courthouse property tax to replace the parish library roof?

Plain-English summary

LaSalle Parish's police jury wanted to help replace the roof of the parish library. It asked whether it could use revenue from a property tax whose voter-approved proposition dedicated the money to improving, maintaining, and operating the parish courthouse.

The 1998 attorney general opinion said the courthouse wording did not cover the library roof. It read the special tax in light of the electorate's consent and the rule that its proceeds were to be used exclusively for the purposes for which the tax was levied. The office said the police jury could ask voters to rededicate the tax proceeds to include the roof work, subject to State Bond Commission approval of a rededication election. It also said its conclusion did not bar use of another funding source that was not otherwise dedicated.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. 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.

Parish officials at the time

The opinion found that the approved courthouse tax could not pay for the separate library building's roof. It identified a voter rededication request and otherwise unrestricted funds as possible routes for the police jury.

Library boards at the time

The library's need for roof repairs did not broaden the courthouse tax proposition. The opinion turned on what voters had authorized the tax to fund.

Local taxpayers at the time

The office treated the terms of the tax proposition as controlling the use of the proceeds. The opinion said a proposed rededication election required State Bond Commission approval.

Common questions

Q: Did a public library roof count as maintaining the parish courthouse?
A: No. The opinion said the tax proposition's courthouse language was not broad enough to include roof replacement on the parish library building.

Q: Could the parish ask voters to change the dedicated purpose?
A: The office said the police jury could request voter rededication to include the roof work, with State Bond Commission approval for the rededication election.

Q: Did the opinion prevent the parish from using any public money for the roof?
A: No. It expressly said another funding source could be used if that source was not otherwise dedicated.

Background and statutory framework

The tax proposition quoted in the opinion levied an eight-mill special tax for courthouse improvement, maintenance, and operation. The opinion quoted Louisiana Constitution Article VI, Section 32 on voter authorization of special taxes. It also quoted R.S. 39:704, which treated special-tax proceeds as a trust fund for the purposes for which the tax was levied. The office referred to R.S. 39:1410.61 for approval of a rededication election.

Citations and references

• R.S. 39:704 (exclusive use of special-tax proceeds)
• R.S. 39:1410.61 (State Bond Commission approval for a rededication election)
• Louisiana Constitution Article VI, Section 32 (special-tax voter authorization, as quoted in the opinion)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/98-0287

Original opinion text

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

One American Place
301 Mare Street, Suite 600
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. Box 94005
(~IVIL DIVISION
TEL.: (504) 342-7013
FAX: (504) 342-2090
BATON ROUGE
70804-9005
ATTORNEY C~ENERAL
OPINION NUMBER 98-287
AUGUST 0 5199~

Syllabus

88: Police Juries: General
Hon. J. Reed Waiters, D.A.
129: Taxation: Levy & Assessment :Ad Valorem
28th JDC - LaSalle Parish
Article VI, Section 32 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974
R.S. 39:704
PO Box 1940
AG Op No. 96-494
Jena, LA 71342-1940
Parish Police Jury may not use revenues generated from ad valorem taxes dedicated for the improving, maintaining and I or operating of the Parish courthouse for the cost associated with the replacement of a roof on the Parish library building.
Dear Mr. Waiters:

You have requested an opinion of the Attorney General on behalf of the LaSalle Parish Police Jury (Police Jury) regarding the use of revenues generated from an ad valorem tax for the purpose of financing the cost incidental to the replacement of a roof on the parish library.

You state that the library building is in desperate need of repairs and the Police Jury has agreed to assist the library board in the replacement of the roof. You have furnished us with a copy of the tax proposition at issue which reads:

"Shall the Parish of LaSalle re-levy a special tax of 8.00 mills on the dollar of the assessed valuation of all property subject to taxation within said Parish for a period of ten (10) years, beginning with the year 1995 and ending with the year 2,004, inclusive, for the Dumose of improving, maintaining, and operating the courthouse in and for said Parish, title to which shall be in the public." [ Emphasis added. ]

We find the following constitutional and statutory provisions to be relevant to this issue:

"Art. VI, §32. Special Tax; authorization

Section 32. For the purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, maintaining, or operating any work of public improvement, a political subdivision may levy special taxes when authorized by a majority of the electors in the political subdivision who vote thereon in an election held for that purpose.

Page 2

Opinion No. 98-287
J, Reed Waiters, D.A.
28th JDC - LaSalle Parish
Page -2-

R.S. 39:704. Proceeds of special tax

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. The records of the taxing authority shall clearly reflect the objects and purposes for which the proceeds of the tax are used."

It is well established that the scope of the authority for the expenditure of millage revenues is concomitant to the consent of the electorate. The ordinary sense of the words contained in the proposition is dispositive of their meaning for the electorate approving the millage. Further, our courts have uniformly held that special taxes must be strictly construed. Police Jury of the Parish of Acadia v. All Taxpayers, et aL, 653 So.2d 94 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1995), writ denied; and Hemlerv. RichlandParish SchoolBoard, 142 La. 133, 76 So. 585 (1917). In Hemler, our Supreme Court specifically held that:

"It is [a] familiar principle that laws authorizing taxation.., are in derogation of common rights, and therefore, to be strictly construed. And this is especially true of laws authorizing special taxes. If, therefore, among the enumerated purposes for which a certain special tax is authorized to be levied, a certain particular purpose is not mentioned, the conclusion is inevitable that for this unnamed purpose the tax may not be levied."

As previously noted, the tax proposition placed before the constituents of the Parish dedicate the tax revenues for".., the purpose of improving, maintaining, and operating the courthouse in and for said Parish .... " We believe that this language is not broad enough to include the replacement of the roof on the Parish library building.

While we conclude that the subject tax revenues may not be used for the replacement of the roof, in question, the Police Jury could request the voters to rededicate the proceeds of the tax so as to include same. A rededication election would have to be approved by the State Bond Commission as per R.S. 39:1410.61. In accord is Attorney General Opinion No. 96-494.

Further, our conclusion would not prohibit the Police Jury from utilizing another funding source for these repairs -- a source that is not otherwise dedicated.

Page 3

Opinion No. 98-287
J. Reed Waiters, D.A.
28th JDC - LaSalle Parish
Page ~3-

Trusting this adequately responds to your inquiry, I am

Very truly yours,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
Attorney General

Assistant Attorney General

RPI / Rob3/cla