Judges: DUSTIN McDANIEL, Attorney General
Filed Date: 10/6/2008
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
The Honorable Johnny Key State Representative 1030 Highway 62 E Mountain Home, Arkansas 72653-3216
Dear Representative Key:
I am writing in response to your request for an opinion concerning a possible conflict of interest in connection with a waste tire project in northwest Arkansas involving the Northwest Arkansas Regional Solid Waste Management District ("SWMD"), the Northwest Arkansas Economic Development District ("EDD"), DAMCO, Inc., and Tire Disposal Systems, Inc. Your question pertains specifically to the chairman of the board of the EDD, who you report also is president and owner of DAMCO, Inc., a private company that operates a waste tire project (the "DAMCO Tire Project") within the SWMD's service area. You further report that the property which is the site of the DAMCO Tire Project is owned by the individual in question and leased to the SWMD for $1.00. You have asked whether there is a conflict of interest between the parties in this situation.
In determining what ethical strictures might apply in this situation, I note as an initial matter that there are no provisions in the applicable subchapter governing the EDD (A.C.A. §§
The common law prohibition against conflicts of interest is reflected in the following description of the public policy underlying the principle:
A public office is a public trust . . . and the holder thereof may not use it directly or indirectly for personal profit, or to further his own interest, since it is the policy of law to keep an official so far from temptation as to insure his unselfish devotion to the public interest. Officers are not permitted to place themselves in a position in which personal interest may come into conflict with the duty which they owe to the public, and where a conflict of interest arises, the office holder is disqualified to act in the particular matter and must withdraw.
67 C.J.S. Officers § 204. See also Ops. Att'y Gen.
1999-349 ; 98-275; 94-283; and 94-446, citing Van Hovenberg v. Holman,201 Ark. 370 ,144 S.W.2d 719 (1940); Madden v. United States Associates,40 Ark. App. 143 ,844 S.W.2d 374 (1992); Acme Brick Co. v. Missouri Pacific R.R.,307 Ark. 363 ,821 S.W.2d 7 (1991); and 63A Am. Jur. 2d Public Officers and Employees § 321.The above-quoted policy statement concerning conflicts of interest makes clear that in situations where a common law conflict of interest is present, it may be appropriate for the affected public servant to abstain from participating in any decision-making procedure that would impact upon his or her personal interests, so as *Page 3 to avoid the temptation of placing his self-interest above the interest of those he was elected to represent. This policy statement appears to indicate that the wrong to be avoided is the placing of self-interest above public duty. Whether a wrong of this nature has occurred is entirely a question of fact and can only be established by the presentation of factual evidence showing both the motivation and the effect of the public servant's act.
Op. Att'y Gen.
In Op. Att'y Gen.
The pertinent statutory ethical provision is set forth at A.C.A. §
No public official or state employee shall use or attempt to use his or her official position to secure special privileges or exemption for himself or herself or his or her spouse, child, parents, or other persons standing in the first degree of relationship, or for those with whom he or she has a substantial financial relationship that is not available to others except as may be otherwise provided by law.1
As my predecessor noted in Op. Att'y Gen.
An economic development authority is a public, regional entity, and as such its directors are subject to these ethical proscriptions, in my opinion. Accord Op. Att'y Gen.
While I am unable to resolve the issue you have posed due to its factual nature, the foregoing will hopefully be of assistance in guiding the legal analysis.
Assistant Attorney General Elisabeth A. Walker prepared the foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
DUSTIN McDANIEL, Attorney General
*Page 1