CEO 77-170 -- November 10, 1977
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
CHIEF OF POLICE OWNING MATERIAL INTEREST IN COMPANY DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY
To: John Phillips, Jr., City Manager, Wildwood
SUMMARY:
Reference is made to CEO's 76-10 and 76-150. No conflict of interest existed on the part of a chief of police who, in 1976, contracted with the city commission for the remodeling of city hall, inasmuch as the business was transacted not with the police department but with the city commission through the city manager. However, this opinion does not address the issue of whether the former city manager may have misused his public position in violation of s. 112.313(6), as that question was not before the commission.
As guidance for current and future business transactions with officers and employees of the city, attention is directed to Ch. 77-349, Laws of Florida, enacted during the 1977 Legislative Session, which provides certain limited exemptions to the prohibitions contained in s. 112.313(3) and (7), F. S.
QUESTION:
Was a prohibited conflict of interest created where a business entity in which a municipal chief of police owns a material interest contracted during 1976 for the remodeling of city hall with the city commission which employs said police chief?
You advise in your letter of inquiry and in subsequent contacts with our staff that the Wildwood City Commission, which employs that municipality's chief of police, on December 30, 1975, voted to authorize the city manager to let bids for the renovation of the city hall. Although the subject city manager has since resigned, with your having assumed his position, the records indicate that there was neither advertising for bids nor the receipt of any bids other than a cost estimate proposal submitted by Lynum, Lynum & Lynum, Contractors, of which Chief of Police Edward Lynum, Jr., is a partner. The renovation work was accomplished by that business, with payments totaling $2624.00 having been made to Lynum, Lynum, & Lynum from the city commission.
Based on the rationale contained in the enclosed precedent opinions CEO's 76-10 and 76-150, we find no conflict of interest to have existed on the part of the subject chief of police at the time of the above-described conduct inasmuch as the business was transacted not with the police department but with the city council through the city manager. We hasten to add, also, that this opinion does not address the issue of whether the former city manager may have misused his public position in violation of s. 112.313(6), as that question is not before us.
We are enclosing for your information a copy of Ch. 77-349, Laws of Florida, enacted during the most recent legislative session, which took effect in June of this year and provides certain limited exemptions to the prohibitions contained in s. 112.313(3) and (7). We offer this statute as guidance to your municipality for current and future business transactions with officers and employees of the city. Should you have questions as to this amendment's applicability to particular cases which may arise in the future, you are entitled to seek the further opinion of this commission.