CEO 78-76 -- October 20, 1978

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

USE OF STATE LEGISLATOR'S LEGISLATIVE STAFF, OFFICE, OR RESOURCES IN CAMPAIGN FOR REELECTION

To: (Name withheld at the person's request.)

Prepared by: Phil Claypool

SUMMARY:

The Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees does not specifically address campaign ethics. However, s. 112.313(6), F. S., provides that no public officer or employee may corruptly use or attempt to use his official position or any public property or resource to benefit himself or others. "Corruptly," in turn, is defined to include an act or omission done with wrongful intent and inconsistently with the proper performance of public duty. Section 112.312(7), F. S. 1977. The proper performance of one's public duties on the whole is set forth by law, rule, or regulation. In the context of a legislator's use of public office, employees, or resources in a reelection campaign, this would include the election laws, House and Senate rules, and Ch. 11, F. S. So long as a legislator's conduct is consistent with such laws, rules, and regulations, the interpretation of which lies with the various governmental bodies with jurisdiction over them, there would be no violation of the Code of Ethics.

QUESTION:

Under the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees, to what extent may a legislator use his or her legislative staff, office, and resources in a reelection campaign?

The Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees does not specifically address campaign ethics. The only section of the Code of Ethics which potentially is relevant to your question provides as follows:

MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION. -- No public officer or employee of an agency shall corruptly use or attempt to use his official position or any property or resource which may be within his trust, or perform his official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself or others. This section shall not be construed to conflict with s. 104.31. [Section 112.313(6), F. S. 1977.]

The term "corruptly" is defined to mean

done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining, or compensating or receiving compensation for, any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant which is inconsistent with the proper performance of his public duties. [Section 112.312(7), F. S. 1977.]

Thus, if a public officer's actions are consistent with the proper performance of his public duties, there could be no violation of the above-quoted provision. In our view, the proper performance of one's public duties on the whole is set forth by law, rule, or regulation. In the context of your question this would include the election laws, House (or Senate) Rules, and Ch. 11, F. S. For an interpretation of those provisions it would be necessary to contact the various governmental bodies with jurisdiction over them.

Accordingly, so long as your use of legislative staff, officers, or resources in your reelection campaign is consistent with applicable statutes, rules, and the interpretations of those governmental bodies which have jurisdiction over them, there would be no violation of the Code of Ethics.