Can Adams County let homeless individuals shower at its FEMA-funded emergency shelter when there is no declared disaster?

Plain-English summary

Adams County owns an emergency shelter that was built with a FEMA grant. The shelter has showers intended for use during declared disasters. The county wanted to know if it could open the showers to local homeless individuals when no disaster is declared. As a backup, if the answer was no, the county asked whether it could declare a "state of emergency for the homeless" to authorize the use.

The AG answered the first question yes (with conditions) and the second question is moot. The Mississippi state-law analysis is the same uniform-policy framework from the Bruni opinion (also Dec. 2025): a county can let private individuals or groups use county property if (1) the use is in accordance with a uniform written policy adopted by the county's governing authorities, and (2) the county collects from the user any expenses it incurs because of the use (cleaning, utilities, custodial overtime). Without those two protections, the use would be a "donation" prohibited by Miss. Code Ann. § 19-3-40(3).

The county-side legal source here (Section 19-3-40(3)) is parallel to the municipal donation prohibition (Section 21-17-5(2)) the AG had been working with for cities. The framework is identical: no donation without statutory authority; uniform-policy plus cost-recovery is what keeps a use from being a donation in the legal sense.

The opinion specifically declines to interpret federal law. The shelter was built with FEMA funds, and FEMA's grant agreement and federal regulations may impose additional restrictions on what the county can do with the property. Those questions are outside the AG's opinion authority under Section 7-5-25. The county should run any expanded-use proposal past its FEMA point of contact and federal grant counsel before going live.

What this means for you

County supervisors with a county-owned shelter

The opinion holds the county has discretion to allow private use of a public building so long as the use accords with a uniform policy enacted by the governing authorities, and the county collects from the user any expenses it incurs as a result of the use (the opinion names cleaning fees and utility charges). Without that, the use would be a donation barred by Section 19-3-40(3). The opinion expressly declines to interpret the FEMA grant or any federal law, noting that is outside the AG's authority under Section 7-5-25.

Homeless individuals and homeless-services advocates

Under the opinion, a county is not required to open a disaster shelter for routine use, but it may do so through a uniform policy that recovers the county's costs. The state-law answer is the same whether the user is an individual or a group.

County attorneys

The opinion applies the same uniform-policy plus cost-recovery framework it used in Bruni and Barton to a county facility, with Section 19-3-40(3) supplying the county-side donation prohibition. It separates the state-law question from the federal grant question and answers only the former.

Emergency management directors

The opinion treats the shelter's off-disaster use as permissible under state law if the county adopts a uniform policy and recovers its costs. It does not opine on whether the FEMA grant agreement permits the use; that is a federal question the opinion leaves to the county.

Common questions

Q: Why does Section 19-3-40(3) come into this?
A: Section 19-3-40(3) prohibits county boards from "us[ing] any public funds, equipment, supplies or materials for any private purpose" and from "grant[ing] any donation." Letting private individuals use county property for free without authorization or cost recovery falls within "donation" because the property's use has economic value that's being given away. The statute is the county-side analog to Section 21-17-5(2) for municipalities.

Q: Could the county declare a "state of emergency for the homeless" as an alternative?
A: The opinion treats this as moot because the answer to question one is yes (with conditions). Practically, declaring a state of emergency for an ongoing condition is unusual and may not align with the typical "declared disaster" framework FEMA uses; the uniform-policy approach is cleaner.

Q: What does the FEMA grant restrict, exactly?
A: This opinion declines to opine on FEMA grant terms. Generally, FEMA grants for emergency shelters require the property to remain available for disaster sheltering and may restrict uses that would compromise that availability. The county should review its specific grant agreement and consult with FEMA. The state-law analysis is independent of the federal grant question.

Q: Does the user have to pay rent for the use?
A: No. The AG's framework requires cost recovery (actual expenses the county incurs), not market rent. A homeless individual using a shelter shower for an hour likely imposes minimal marginal cost; the county can either absorb that cost (via the policy if it explicitly says so) or charge a token amount that approximates the cost. Charging market rent is not required.

Q: How does the uniform-policy requirement apply when the use is for individuals (not groups)?
A: The policy can address individual use just as easily as group use. It just needs to set out the categories of permitted users (e.g., "homeless individuals as identified by the county's homeless services coordinator"), the conditions, the cost-recovery rule, and the application or admission process. Whatever the policy says has to apply uniformly to similarly-situated users.

Q: What if the county wants to charge nothing at all?
A: Charging nothing is fine if the use imposes no marginal cost on the county. If the use does impose costs, the policy needs to recover them, either through user payment or through an identified third-party funding source (a partner nonprofit, a grant). The constitutional concern is the donation, which arises when the county absorbs the cost without any consideration coming back.

Background and statutory framework

Mississippi has a parallel structure for county and municipal donations. For counties, Section 19-3-40(3) is the no-donation rule. For cities, Section 21-17-5(2) is. Both rules trace back to Article 4, Section 95 of the Mississippi Constitution, which limits the legislature's power to authorize gifts of public funds.

The exception that the AG has carved out (and that runs across many opinions including Short 2009, Barton 2020, Bruni 2025, and now Slover 2025) is the uniform-policy + cost-recovery framework. A public entity can let private parties use public property if (1) the entity has adopted a uniform written policy authorizing such use, and (2) the entity collects actual costs from the user. The structure converts an apparent donation into a regulated cost-recovery arrangement.

Adams County's emergency shelter case is the first time the AG has applied the framework to a FEMA-funded county facility. The state-law answer is the same as for any other county property. The federal grant complication is acknowledged but punted to the county's FEMA contact.

The opinion is a useful pair to the Bruni opinion (private use of city hall by a political party committee). Together they cement that the AG sees the uniform-policy framework as the right vehicle for off-purpose use of public property, regardless of whether the user is a political committee, a private group, or an individual.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25 (AG opinion authority)
• Miss. Code Ann. § 19-3-40 (county donation prohibition)

Prior AG opinions referenced:

• MS AG Op., Bruni (Dec. 8, 2025) (uniform-policy framework for private use of city hall)
• MS AG Op., Barton (Oct. 5, 2020) (cost reimbursement requirement)

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/S.-Slover-December-30-2025-Use-of-County-Owned-Emergency-Shelter.pdf

Original opinion text

December 30, 2025

Scott F. Slover, Esq.
Attorney, Adams County Board of Supervisors
Post Office Box 846
Natchez, Mississippi 39121

Re: Use of County-Owned Emergency Shelter

Dear Mr. Slover:

The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Background

According to your request, Adams County owns an emergency shelter through a Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA") grant. The shelter includes a shower for temporary use during declared emergencies. Based on this information, you ask the following questions.

Questions Presented

1. When there is not a declared disaster, may the county allow homeless individuals to take showers at its shelter?

2. If the answer to question one is no, may the county declare a state of emergency for the homeless to authorize them to be able to use its shelter for showers?

Brief Response

1. Yes, the county has the discretion to allow private use of a public building so long as such use "accord[s] with a uniform policy enacted by the . . . governing authorities." MS AG Op., Bruni at 1 (Dec. 8, 2025) (quoting MS AG Op., Barton at 1 (Oct. 5, 2020)). This said, the county "must collect from the user any expenses that [it] is required to expend as a result of the . . . facility being used." Id.

2. Given the answer to question one, this question is moot.

Applicable Law and Discussion

To begin, in accordance with Mississippi Code Annotated Section 7-5-25, this opinion solely addresses considerations under Mississippi law. This office is not authorized to interpret contracts or agreements or opine upon federal law, guidelines, or regulations. See Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25. We likewise may not opine upon any past actions. Id.

You ask if the county may allow homeless individuals to take showers at the county's shelter when there is not a declared disaster. Section 19-3-40(3) prohibits county boards of supervisors from "us[ing] any public funds, equipment, supplies or materials for any private purpose" and from "grant[ing] any donation." However, as we recently stated in Bruni, the county has the discretion to allow private use of a public building so long as such use "accord[s] with a uniform policy enacted by the . . . governing authorities." MS AG Op., Bruni at 1 (quoting MS AG Op., Barton at 1). This said, the county "must collect from the user any expenses that [it] is required to expend as a result of the . . . facility being used — i.e., cleaning fees or charges for utilities; otherwise, such uncompensated use would constitute a donation." Id.

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/ Maggie Kate Bobo
Maggie Kate Bobo
Special Assistant Attorney General