Was the Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg a public body under South Carolina law?

Plain-English summary

A South Carolina representative asked in 2009 whether Spartanburg’s housing authority was a public body while the authority sought federal Neighborhood Stabilization funds. The Attorney General concluded that the Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg was a public corporate body and a political subdivision of South Carolina.

The letter traced the authority to a 1938 city council resolution declaring its creation a public corporate purpose. It also quoted the state Housing Authorities Law, which authorized creation of a public body corporate and politic in each city, and relied on earlier opinions classifying South Carolina housing authorities as public bodies and political subdivisions. It did not decide eligibility for the particular federal grant.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2009. 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 the AG classify Spartanburg’s housing authority as a public body? A: Yes. The opinion called it a public corporate body and a political subdivision of the state.

Q: How had the authority been created?
A: The letter identified a Spartanburg City Council resolution under South Carolina’s Housing Authorities Law as the authority’s foundation.

Q: Did this opinion approve its federal funding application? A: No. The application supplied the reason for the question, but the opinion addressed the authority’s status under state law.

Background and statutory framework

The Attorney General quoted the 1938 city resolution, the predecessor Housing Authorities Law, and Section 31-3-310 of the state code. Earlier opinions had treated public housing authorities as public bodies politic and corporate. The office applied those authorities to the Spartanburg authority’s status.

Citations and references

Statute discussed: Section 31-3-310, authorizing creation of a public body corporate and politic as a city housing authority.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/july-7-2009-2/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/mitchell-h-jr-os-8816-7-7-09-housing-authority-of-city-of-spartanburg.pdf

Original opinion text

H ENRY MCMASTER
ATIORNEY GENERAL

July 7, 2009

The Honorable Harold Mitchell, Jr.
Member, House of Representatives
District No. 31 - Spartanburg County
P.O. Box 3046
Spartanburg, South Carolina 29304-3046
Dear Representative Mitchell:
We received your letter requesting an opinion of this Office concerning the status of the Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg, S.C. ("the Authority'') as a public body. We understand from your letter that the Authority is "making application with the U.S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development for Neighborhood Stabilization funds, 'NSP2."' You requested our opinion regarding the status of the Authority as a public body existing pursuant to the laws of the State of South Carolina. Law/Analysis

The Authority was constituted pursuant to a resolution of the City Council ofthe City of Spartanburg on April 20, 1938 ("the CityResolution"). Section 4 ofthe City Resolution states, "The organization of a Housing authority in the City of Spartanburg, South Carolina is declared to be a corporate and public purpose." The City Resolution references its adoption "in pursuance of the ' Housing Authorities Law' as amended of the State of South Carolina." Resolution ofthe City Council of the City of Spartanburg, S.C., April 20, 1938. At the time the City Resolution was enacted, Section 2 of the Housing Authorities Law, Act No. 783, Acts of the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina, 1934, provided as follows:

Section 2. Declaration of Public Interest.- It is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination that in order to promote and protect the health, safety, morals and welfare of the public, it is necessary in the public interest to provide for the creation of public corporate bodies to be known as housing authorities, and to confer upon and vest in said housing authorities all powers necessary or appropriate in order that they may engage in low-cost housing and slum clearance projects; and that the powers herein conferred upon the housing authorities including the power to acquire property to remove unsanitary or substandard conditions, to construct and R BMBERT c. D ENNIS B UlLOING •

Posr OFFICE Box 11.549 • COLUMBIA , SC 2921 1-1549 • TELEPHONE 803-734-3970 • FACSIMll.E 803-253-6283

The Honorable Harold Mitchell, Jr.
Page2
July 7, 2009

operate housing accommodations and to borrow, expend, lend and repay moneys for the purposes herein set forth, are public objects essential to the public interest. 1934 S.C. Acts 1368, 1370. Act No. 783 of 1934 was the predecessor of the current South Carolina Housing Authorities Law, found in the South Carolina Code of Laws, 1976, Title 31, Chapters 3 and 11. (S.C. Code Ann. Section 31-3-10 et seq.) Section 31-3-310 provides that "[i]n each city of the State there may be created in the manner herein prescribed a public body corporate and politic to be known as the "Housing Authority of
." S.C. Code of Laws, 1976, as amended, Section 31-3-310.
In prior opinions of this Office, we have addressed the legal status of public housing authorities in the State of South Carolina. In an opinion dated March 24, 1970, citing S.C. Code Sections 36-2, 36-111 and 36-138, Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1962, we concluded that "public housing authorities are declared and found to be public bodies politic and corporate and political subdivisions of the state, whose properties are exempted from payment of all taxes and special assessments of the City, the County, the State or any political subdivision thereof." Op. S.C. Atty. Gen., March 24, 1970. In another opinion concerning the legal status of the Housing Authority of the City of Lancaster, we concluded that it was "a political subdivision of the State and an 'employer' within the meaning of Code Section 61-1 (5) [Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1962]." Op. S.C. Atty. Gen., August 13, 1975.

Conclusion
Consistent with our prior opinions, and based on the authority cited above, it is the opinion of this Office that the Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg, S.C., is a public corporate body and a political subdivision of the State. Yours very truly, Henry McMaster Attorney General

By:

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

/~2:;i·GB~

Rooert D. Cook
Deputy Attorney General

·

~dt4~

Elizabeth H. Smith
Assistant Attorney General