OFFICIAL OPINION No. 10

OFFICIAL OPINION No. 10 Confiict of interest-Incompatibility of offices of Recorder of Deeds and County Commissioner in counties of the fourth class. 1. Pursuant to Article VI, Section 2 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Gen- eral Assembly may, by law, declare what offices are incompatible. OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 21 2. Section 1302(a) of the County Code, Act of August 9, 1955, P. L. 323, 16 P. S. § 1302(a) provides that, in counties of the fourth class, one person shall hold the office of recorder of deeds. 3. No statutory authorization exists for a person to hold county offices simul- taneously for third and fourth class counties, whereas such authorization does exist for counties of the fifth through eighth classes. 4. The offices of recorder of deeds and county commissioner in fourth class counties are incompatible, both in law and in fact. Honorable C. DeLores Tucker Secretary of the Commonwealth Room 308, Capitol Building Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Dear Mrs. Tucker: Harrisburg, Pa., March 11, 1971 Following is our opinion relative to the incompatibility of one person holding the offices of recorder of deeds and county commissioner. Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution provides that: "The Gen- eral Assembly may, by law, declare what offices are incompatible." Section 1302(a) of the County Code of August 9, 1955, P. L. 323, 16 P. S. § 1302(a) provides that, in counties of the fourth class, one person shall hold the office of recorder of deeds, whereas other pro- visions of Section 1302 provide that one person may hold two enumer- ated county offices. This is further evidenced by Sections 1550-1555 of the County Code, 16 P. S. § 1550-1555, which specifically identify, in counties of the fifth through eighth classes, those offices which may be simultaneously held by one person. No such statutory authorization exists for a person to hold two county offices simultaneously for third and fourth class counties. Even where there is dual office holding, none of this duality includes the office of county commissioner. Therefore, the offices of county commissioner and recorder of deeds are statutorily incompatible. In addition, one can easily cite an example which demonstrates that such offices are incompatible in fact. On budgetary and salary matters, it would be incongruous, indeed, to have the same person approve a budget and appropriate money as a county commissioner, as well as spend it to perform the functions of the office of recorder of deeds. 22 OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Therefore, it is my opinion that the offices of recorder of deeds and county commissioner in fourth class counties are incompatible, both in law and in fact. Very truly yours, J. SHANE CREAMER, Attorney General.