Is it a conflict of interest for a newly elected member of the county quorum court to also be a VP of Sales and/or hold some office with Riggs Tractor Company (a company which does business with the county)? 14-14-1202 Conflict of interest does exist.

STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE BUILDING, LITTLE ROCK 72201 STEVE CLARK (501) 371-2007 ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 85-101 April 8, 1985 al Mr. William Clay Brazil Prosecuting Attorney 1005 Front Street Conway, Arkansas 72032 Dear Mr. Brazil: You have requested an opinion from our office on the following question: Does the election to the Faulkner County Quorum Court of a Vice President in charge of sales or another officer of Riggs Tractor Company, preclude the County from continuing to do business with this company? The answer to your question is governed by Ark, Stat. Ann. §17-4208(3) (1980) which provides, inter alia, that "No officer or employee of county government shall: (a) be interested, either directly or indirectly, in any contract or transaction made, authorized, or entered into on behalf of the county . .. ." (Emphasis Added). Although we are aware of no Arkansas case which defines an “indirect interest”, this type of "conflict of interest" statute is common throughout the United States. In United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co., 364 U.S. 520 (1961), the Supreme Court was called upon to interpret a federal provision prohibiting any direct or indirect interest in government contracts by govern- ment agents. The Court said, "The statute is thus directed not only at dishonor, but also at conduct that tempts dishonor, . . +, It attempts to prevent honest government agents from succumbing to tempation by making it illegal for them to enter into relationships which are fraught with temptation." Id at 549-50 We think this interpretation best serves the spirit of §17-4208, significantly entitled "Ethics for county officials and employees." Furthermore, under Arkansas Law, "(T]he meaning of a statute must be determined from the natural and obvious import of the language used by the legislature without resorting to subtle and forced con~ struction, for the purpose of limiting or extending the meaning. * * * * Ite is our duty to construe a legislative enactment just as it reads." City of. North Little Rock v. Montgomery, 261 Ark, 16, 18, 546 S.W. 2d 154, 159 (1977) (Citing Black v. Cockrill, Judge, 247 Ark, 367, 389 S.W. 2d 881 (1965). Mr, William Clay Brazil April 8, 1985 Page 2 The word "indirectly" was defined in Cahen Trust v. United States, 292 F.2d 33, 36-(1961)—as"roundabout;—.. not resuiting-_directly—from—an_act_or_cause_but___ more or less remotely connected with or growing out of it." (Quoting Webster's New International Dictionary.) Also important to the natural and obvious import of the lanpuage used is the breadth of the prohibition, there being no delineated exceptions as in other Arkansas statutes. Compare Ark. Stat, Ann. §19-909 (Supp. 1983). Accordingly, we conclude that §17+-4208 is broad enough to encompass the situation where a Quorum Court member is an officer of a private business enterprise and that a conflict of interest, barring further business with the enterprise, does exist. The foregoing opinion, which IT hereby approve, was prepared by Chief Deputy Attorney General Rodney Parhan, Yo ruly, STENE 4 RK ht- Attorkey General SC:RP:1m