This Advisory Opinion concerns the following issue as formulated from facts and/or circumstances furnished by a requestor. The Commission approved this opinion on December 6, 1996, basing its approval solely on the facts and circumstances stated herein.

May a mental health-mental retardation commission employ the daughter-in- law of one of its commission members?

The pertinent conflict of interest laws to be considered here are:

Constitutional Section 109 states:

"No public officer or member of the legislature shall be interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with the state, or any district, county, city, or town thereof, authorized by any law passed or order made by any board of which he may be or may have been a member, during the term for which he shall have been chosen, or within one year after the expiration of such term."

Code Section 25-4-101 states:

"The legislature declares that elective and public office and employment is a public trust and any effort to realize personal gain through official conduct, other than as provided by law, or as a natural consequence of the employment or position, is a violation of that trust. Therefore, public servants shall endeavor to pursue a course of conduct which will not raise suspicion among the public that they are likely to be engaged in acts that are in violation of this trust and which will not reflect unfavorably upon the state and local governments."

Code Section 25-4-103(f)(i)(ii), (g)(v), (h), (1), (p)(i)(ii)(iii) and (q) states:

"(f) 'Contract' means:

(i) Any agreement to which the government is a party; or

(ii) Any agreement on behalf of the government which involves the payment of public funds.

(g) 'Governmental' means the state and all political entities thereof, both collectively and separately, including but not limited to:

(v) Any department, agency, board, commission, institution, instrumentality, or legislative or administrative body of the state, counties or municipalities created by statute, ordinance or executive order including all units that expend public funds.

(h) 'Governmental entity' means the state, a county, a municipality or any other separate political subdivision authorized by law to exercise a part of the sovereign power of the state.

(1) 'Pecuniary benefit' means benefit in the form of money, property, commercial interests or anything else the primary significance of which is economic gain. Expenses associated with social occasions afforded public servants shall not be deemed a pecuniary benefit.

(p) 'Public servant' means:

(i) Any elected or appointed official of the government;

(ii) Any officer, director, commissioner, supervisor, chief, head, agent or employee of the government or any agency thereof, or of any public entity created by or under the laws of the State of Mississippi or created by an agency or governmental entity thereof, any of which is funded by public funds or which expends, authorizes or recommends the use of public funds; or

(iii) Any individual who receives a salary, per diem or expenses paid in whole or in part out of funds authorized to be expended by the government.

(q) 'Relative' means the spouse, child or parent."

Code Section 25-4-105(1) and (2) states:

"(1) No public servant shall use his official position to obtain pecuniary benefit for himself other than that compensation provided for by law, or to obtain pecuniary benefit for any relative or any business with which he is associated.

(2) No public servant shall be interested, directly or indirectly, during the term for which he shall have been chosen, or within one (1) year after the expiration of such term, in any contract with the state, or any district, county, city or town thereof, authorized by any law passed or order made by any board of which he may be or may have been a member."

The Commission formally adopts Advisory Opinions No. 95-154-E and No. 90-038-E in response to this request and by attachment incorporates them into this opinion.

Based solely on the facts and circumstances presented by the requestor, the Commission's opinion is as follows.

First, the conflict of interest laws recognize that a benefit accruing to one spouse accrues equally to the other. Therefore, any pecuniary benefit to a commission member's daughter-in-law accrues to the commission member's son.

Based on the above, the commission member would have a direct and/or indirect interest in his daughter-in-law's employment by the mental health-mental retardation commission in violation of the above cited Constitutional Section 109 and Code Section 25-4-105(2), unless his son and daughter-in-law are not in any way dependent upon the commission member. The commission member would be required to prove that his son and daughter-in-law are completely and absolutely financially independent from him in order for the mental health-mental retardation commission's employment of his daughter-in-law to not be prohibited by Constitutional Section 109 and Code Section 25-4-105(2).

Notwithstanding the above, the commission member may not use his official position to obtain employment for his daughter-in-law. Such an action would be prohibited by the above cited Code Section 25-4-105(1).

Code Section 25-4-105(1) prohibits public servants from using their official positions to obtain a pecuniary benefit for themselves, a relative or a business with which they are associated.

In order to avoid using their official positions to obtain a pecuniary benefit, the public servants must totally and completely recuse themselves from subject matters providing the pecuniary interests.

An abstention is a vote with the majority of the governing entity's board and therefore does not qualify as a recusal.

A total and complete recusal requires that the public servant not only avoid debating, discussing, or taking action on the subject matter during the official meeting, but also avoid discussing the subject matter with other board members, staff or any other person prior to and after the official meeting. This includes casual comments, as well as detail discussions, made in person, by telephone or by any other means.

Al so in order to properly recuse oneself from a matter, the public servant must leave the room or area where such discussions, considerations and/or actions take place. The minutes of the governing entity's board should state the public servant left the meeting by showing him or her absent for that matter.

Therefore, the commission member must totally and completely recuse himself from the mental health-mental retardation commission's action to employ his daughter-in-law.

The issue presented by the requestor also must be viewed as it relates to Code Section 25-4-101, set forth above. This code section sets the tone for the conflict of interest laws as it is the Legislature's "Declaration of Public Policy." This public policy can be summarized as any circumstance having the potential of creating suspicion among the public and reflecting unfavorably upon the state or local government should be closely reviewed by public servants with the intent to reduce or eliminate any suspicion on the part of the public which detracts from the public's trust in state or local government.

Clearly, a governmental entity's employment of one of its board member's daughter-in-law has the potential of creating suspicion among the public and reflecting unfavorably upon the governmental entity.

Ronald B. Crowe
Executive Director