Can a Mississippi county redirect money from a county-owned nursing home into fire, rescue, and 911 services instead of just ambulance services?
Plain-English summary
Chickasaw County receives money from the Shearer-Richardson Memorial Nursing Home in Okolona under Mississippi's community-hospital statute, Miss. Code § 41-13-38. The county had been using the money to pay for ambulance services. The board of supervisors asked whether it could expand the use to other emergency services, like fire and rescue equipment and 911.
The AG said yes, with one important caveat about who decides. Section 41-13-38 puts the decision-making authority with the nursing home's board of trustees, not the county. The trustees must affirmatively find that the additional emergency-service funding "will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area." If they make that finding, the county may use the money for fire, rescue, and 911 just as legitimately as it had been using it for ambulance service.
The opinion follows a long line of MS AG guidance on the same statute. McKenzie (1989) approved walking-track construction; Hopkins (2016) confirmed donations to the county itself; Snell (2018) approved restrooms, pavilions, and a community wellness center. The pattern: the substantive scope of permissible uses is broad, but the procedural requirement (board-of-trustees finding tied to citizen health or welfare) is rigid.
The opinion treats a county as functionally equivalent to a nonprofit for this statute's purposes, citing the McKenzie analysis. A county is not a for-profit enterprise and is using the money for citizen welfare, so it shares the relevant attributes of the nonprofit recipients § 41-13-38 was designed for.
What this means for you
If you sit on a county board of supervisors: You can request expanded uses of nursing-home funds, but the request goes to the nursing home's trustees, not your board. You cannot redirect the money by your own resolution. Document why the new use serves citizen health or welfare; that framing is what the trustees have to find.
If you are a nursing-home or community-hospital trustee: When you receive a request like this, the statutory finding ("will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area") is not a rubber stamp. Make the finding on the record, with a vote, and tie it to facts about the proposed use. Past AG opinions have treated this as a "factual determination" reserved to the board, so your minutes should show you actually exercised that judgment.
If you run an EMS or 911 service expecting county funding from this source: Your funding stream is conditional on the trustees' finding. Build into your budgeting and grant writing the possibility that trustees could decline, and have a backup plan if the trustees later revisit the question. The decision can shift year to year.
If you are a citizen or journalist: This funding chain is opaque on its surface (state statute → community hospital → nursing home → county → emergency service) but the public record requirements give you a paper trail. The board minutes that authorize each transfer must show the health-or-welfare finding; if they do not, the transfer is procedurally vulnerable.
Common questions
Why does the nursing home control the money instead of the county?
Because § 41-13-38 frames the funding as a "grant" or "financial assistance" from the community hospital to the recipient (nonprofit, county, or otherwise). The hospital's board of trustees is the legal grantor; the county is the recipient. That places discretion with the board.
Does the county have to come back to the trustees every year?
The opinion does not require annual re-approval, but each new use of funds for a different purpose triggers the same finding requirement. A general "we approve any emergency-service use" blanket is risky; specific findings tied to specific uses are how prior AG opinions have framed the requirement.
What if the board of trustees refuses to approve a new use?
The county loses access to the money for that use. The trustees' decision is fact-bound discretion, not subject to county override. The county would have to fund the new service from another source.
Can the trustees impose conditions on the money?
Nothing in the opinion forbids it. As a practical matter, trustees often condition transfers on reporting, segregation of funds, or sunset dates. Those are within the trustees' grant-making authority.
Does this rule apply to all community hospitals or only nursing homes?
Section 41-13-38 covers community hospitals broadly; nursing homes established under Miss. Code §§ 41-13-10 et seq. are included. The same finding requirement and decision-maker applies regardless of whether the funding entity is a hospital or a nursing home.
Could the county use the money for purposes unrelated to health?
Probably not. The "health or welfare of the citizens of the service area" finding is statutory, and AG opinions consistently link approved uses to public health, public safety, or community-welfare functions. A use far removed from those purposes (general government operations, courthouse renovations, etc.) would be hard to justify.
Background and statutory framework
Miss. Code Ann. § 41-13-38 governs the financial-assistance authority of the boards of trustees of community hospitals. Subsection (2) is the operative grant-of-authority provision: a board of trustees "may provide financial assistance or provide grants to nonprofit health-care provider groups and other recognized nonprofit entities and charities where it is determined by the board that such action will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area." Nursing homes established in accordance with Sections 41-13-10 et seq. are included in the "community hospital" category for purposes of this section.
The county-as-recipient question was settled in MS AG Op., McKenzie (Sept. 25, 1989). McKenzie reasoned that although a county is not a per se nonprofit, "a county is a political subdivision of the State and does not act as a for-profit enterprise. In that regard, a county shares features with a nonprofit entity, and in this particular statutory situation, a county and a nonprofit are functionally the same since they are using the community hospital's money for the health and welfare of its citizens."
The decision-allocation principle ("factual determination that must be made by the board of trustees") was reaffirmed in MS AG Op., Hopkins (Nov. 4, 2016) and MS AG Op., Snell (June 22, 2018). Both opinions limit the AG's review role: the AG does not second-guess the trustees' factual judgment, only confirms whether the use falls within the statutory categories.
Citations
The governing statute: Miss. Code Ann. § 41-13-38, particularly subsection (2). The community-hospital framework that defines "community hospital" to include qualifying nursing homes: Miss. Code Ann. §§ 41-13-10 et seq. Prior AG opinions on point: McKenzie (Sept. 25, 1989) (walking tracks); Hall (Aug. 30, 2012); Hopkins (Nov. 4, 2016) (county donations); Snell (June 22, 2018) (park amenities).
Source
- Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/A.-McFarland-December-4-2025-Funds-Provided-by-Nursing-Home.pdf
Original opinion text
December 4, 2025
The Honorable Anderson McFarland
President, Chickasaw County Board of Supervisors
1 Pinson Square
Houston, Mississippi 38851
Re: Funds Provided by Nursing Home
Dear Mr. McFarland:
The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.
Background
According to your request, Chickasaw County ("County") currently receives money from the Shearer-Richardson Memorial Nursing Home ("Nursing Home") in Okolona, Mississippi, pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated Section 41-13-38. Previously, this money has been used to fund ambulance services.
Question Presented
Does the County have the authority to use the money it receives from the Nursing Home to fund other emergency services such as providing fire and rescue equipment and 911 services?
Brief Response
The County may use funds from the Nursing Home for additional emergency services if the Nursing Home determines "that such action will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area" in accordance with Section 41-13-38.
Applicable Law and Discussion
Pursuant to Section 41-13-38, the board of trustees of a community hospital, which includes a nursing home established in accordance with Sections 41-13-10 et seq., "may provide financial assistance or provide grants to nonprofit health-care provider groups and other recognized nonprofit entities and charities where it is determined by the board that such action will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area." In the Snell opinion, we were asked whether a county could use funds from a county nursing home for the layout and construction of restrooms, pavilions, and a community wellness center at a county-owned park. MS AG Op., Snell at 1. We stated that whether this use was permissible is a factual determination that must be made by the board of trustees of the nursing home. Id.; see also MS AG Op., Hopkins at 2 (opining that "[a] community hospital may donate funds to the county upon making the findings required in Section 41-13-38.") (internal citations omitted). Accordingly, the County may use funds from the Nursing Home for additional emergency services if the Nursing Home determines "that such action will benefit the health or welfare of the citizens of the service area" in accordance with Section 41-13-38.
If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL
By:
/s/ Beebe Garrard
Beebe Garrard
Special Assistant Attorney General
Footnote 1: Historically, counties have been allowed to receive funds pursuant to this statute. See MS AG Ops., McKenzie at *3 (Sept. 25, 1989) (opining that the construction of walking tracks "would be a legitimate exercise of the authority granted by § 41–13–38(2) as financial assistance to Forrest County"); Hall (Aug. 30, 2012); Hopkins (Nov. 4, 2016); Snell (June 22, 2018). Although not per se a nonprofit entity, a county is a political subdivision of the State and does not act as a for-profit enterprise. In that regard, a county shares features with a nonprofit entity, and in this particular statutory situation, a county and a nonprofit are functionally the same since they are using the community hospital's money for the health and welfare of its citizens.