CEO 80-22 -- March 20, 1980

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

DEPUTY SHERIFFS LEASING PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES TO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

To: William A. Freeman, Jr., Monroe County Sheriff, Key West

Prepared by: Phil Claypool

SUMMARY:

In previous advisory opinions, CEO's 76-43A and 79-3, it was found that, were a deputy sheriff to lease his privately owned vehicle to the sheriff's department, he would be considered to be doing business with his agency in violation of s. 112.313(3), F. S., unless the terms of the agreement were authorized by s. 112.061, F. S., which specifies the amount and manner of reimbursement for travel expenses of public officers and employees. When a sheriff leases private vehicles belonging to his deputies pursuant to a special act of the Legislature, ch. 75-1062, which provides for reimbursement to deputy sheriffs and employees of the sheriff for expenses legitimately incurred in the line of public duty, compliance with that act would not violate the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees. However, the Commission on Ethics has no authority to determine whether the leases utilized by the sheriff's department comply with the special act; it is suggested that the Attorney General be contacted in this respect.

QUESTION:

Does a prohibited conflict of interest exist when a deputy sheriff leases his private automobile to the sheriff's department pursuant to a special act of the Legislature?

In your letter of inquiry you advise that, as the Sheriff of Monroe County, you have leased private vehicles belonging to your deputies for the sheriff's department pursuant to ch. 65-1062, Laws of Florida. Generally, that special act provides that the Sheriff of Monroe County may grant monthly allowances to his deputies and employees for the use of their privately owned automobiles in the performance of their duties.

In previous advisory opinions, we have found that were a deputy sheriff to lease his privately owned vehicle to the sheriff's department, he would be considered to be doing business with his agency in violation of s. 112.313(3), F. S., unless the terms of the agreement were authorized by s. 112.061, F. S., which specifies the amount and manner of reimbursement for travel expenses of public officers and employees. See CEO's 76-43A and 79-3. Chapter 65- 1062, Laws of Florida, similarly provides for reimbursement to deputy sheriffs and employees of the sheriff for expenses legitimately incurred in the line of public duty. Therefore, under our rationale in CEO 76-43A, compliance with that act would not violate the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees. We are unable to provide you with a more specific answer to your question since we would have to determine whether the leases utilized by the sheriff's department comply with ch. 65-1062. As we advised in CEO 79-3, we do not have the authority to render such an opinion, and we suggest that you contact the Attorney General in this respect.