© 2005-2006 Arkansas Legislative Digest, Inc.
2007
2007-EC-001Sloan2/16/2007
Elections (Campaign Finance; Transfer of Carryover Funds). Question: Is it permissible for a former officeholder to transfer carryover funds to an exploratory committee which he or she is establishing to explore running for a particular office?
______
Requested by: Cecile Bledsoe, former State Representative, Rogers
Opinion: Carryover campaign funds may be transferred to an active campaign account. Since all funds contributed to an exploratory committee are required to be transferred to the campaign of a single candidate, it is opined that it is permissible for the carryover funds to be transferred to the candidate’s own exploratory committee (although not to an exploratory committee for someone other than the holder of the campaign funds).
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2007-EC-002Sloan3/16/2007
Elections (Campaign Finance; Legal Defense Costs) – Public Servants. Question: Is it permissible for an elected official to receive donations and otherwise raise money to pay the costs of his legal defense in an action resulting from an election contest (here, the 2006 Democratic primary election)?
______
Requested by: Robert T. Rogers, II, Prosecuting Attorney, 19th Judicial District East, Mena
Opinion:Arkansas law clearly allows candidates to solicit funds after a campaign has ended for the purpose of retiring debt. It is opined that the legal expenses in question were incurred in connection with the election contest and are therefore directly related to his campaign for prosecuting attorney. It is, therefore, permissible for the official to accept contributions to pay these debts of the campaign. The contributions must be treated as contributions to the previous campaign and all contribution limits apply. The contributionsand expenditure of the funds must be reported in the regular quarterly reporting form.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2007-EC-003Sloan8/17/2007
Elections (Political Action Committees; Contribution from Related Companies). Question: Company A has created companies B and C as ”single member” limited liability companies (LLCs). May companies B and C make contributions of $5,000 each to the approved political action committee (PAC) organized by company A?
______
Requested by: Michael O. Parker, Attorney at Law, Little Rock
Opinion: Separate contributions to by an individual owner and his related corporations are permissible so long as the entities are not established or operated with the intent to circumvent the limits campaign contribution. It appears companies B and C were established for legitimate business reasons, not to circumvent campaign finance law. Therefore the PAC of company A may accept up to $5,000 annually from each of companies A, B, and C.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2007-EC-004Sloan8/17/2007
Public Servants (Boards and Commissions; Conflicts of Interest). Question: May a member of a state commission be involved in decision making pertaining to a company or corporation in which the member is a minor common stock owner?
______
Requested by: Bill C. Poynter, Texarkana, member of the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission.
Opinion: Mr. Poynter has suggested that perhaps he may participate in the decision regarding a company in which he has stock interest by virtue of the exception allowed to commissioners who aremembers of a large class (here, common stock holders), so long as he has disclosed his stock interest in a statement of financial interest (Section 403 of the Commission’s Rules on Conflicts). The Commission here notes that state law contains a general prohibition against a member of a state board or commission participating in an official decision if the member has a “pecuniary interest in the matter under consideration.”It further rules that the exception allowing participation if the pecuniary interest accrues to a commissioner “as a member of a profession, occupation, or large class” would apply to, for example, stockholders in all utility companies, not to a commissioner who is a member of a group of stockholders in one company with business before the Commission, and that Mr. Poynter should not participate in commission business related to the corporation in question. (See also opinion 2002-EC-008)
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2007-EC-005Sloan10/19/2007
Public Servants (CountyEmployees; Outside Compensation). Question: Is it permissible for county road department employees and county sheriff’s office employees to receive compensation from an anonymous donor?
______
Requested by: Robert T. Rogers, II, Prosecuting Attorney, 19th Judicial District East, Berryville
Opinion: Even though the $20,000 donation in this instance donation was made anonymously to CarrollCounty, with only instructions that it be evenly split between the county road department and sheriff’s offices for use as bonuses, both the acceptance by public servants of, and the conferring of such compensation is prohibited. (ACA § 21-8-801 and § 21-8-801(b)(1), respectively). It is additionally suspect that the donor is an asphalt vendor to the county. However, the Commission does not here address the potential conflict of interest in this relationship.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2007-EC-006Sloan10/19/2007
Public Servants (CountyOfficials; Dual Compensation). Question: May a county Justice of the Peace receive compensation from the county for his service as a volunteer in a group of hazardous material incident responders?
______
Requested by: John Hall, CountyJudge, CrawfordCounty
Opinion:Arkansas law does not expressly prohibit a public official, such as a Justice of the Peace, who receives compensation for serving as an elected official from receiving compensation from the governmental entity he or she serves for service rendered in some other capacity. Such public officials are prohibited from using his or her official position to secure privileges not available to others. However, since the Justice of the Peace was serving as a Hazmat Responder prior to his election to office, and is still being paid at the same rate as other Responders, the Commission concludes there is no conflict.
Author: Robert L. Roddey, Staff AttorneySee Full Opinion
2007-EC-007Sloan11/16/2007
Counties (Quorum Courts; Bonus to Officials) – Public Officials/Public Employees. Question: May a Quorum Court award longevity bonuses to full time county employees and elected officials, including themselves?
______
Requested by: Ray Cooper, Concord
Opinion: Because members of the quorum court are legislators, the inherent conflict in voting a bonus to themselves requires each to file a statement describing the matter. Other than that, a quorum court is not prohibited from such a vote. However, public servants must be “duly entitled” to all compensation received. State law at ACA 14-14-1205 regulates compensation to quorum court members. If the bonus causes their compensationto exceed the limit allowed by law,quorumcourt members are not “duly entitled” to the bonus.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2008
2008-EC-001Sloan1/18/2008
Public Servants (CountyOfficials; Conflict of Interest) – Contractors/Purchasing. Does a conflict of interest exist if a county awards a bid for equipment for patrol cars of the Sheriff’s Department to a company which employs a member of the quorum court of the county?
______
Requested by: Jonathan Greer, SalineCounty Attorney, Benton
Opinion: The county may award a purchase contract in this situation, provided the potential conflict of interest of the quorum court member is either readily apparent on his statement of financial interest or he has filed a statement reporting the potential conflict. There is no statute that expressly prohibits a quorum court member from voting on matters that relate to an interest of his employer.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See Full Opinion
2008-EC-002Sloan2/15/2008
Elections (Campaign Finance; Corporate Contributions). Question: Are corporations included under the heading “individual person” in the Disclosure Act for Public Initiatives and thus required to report all money raised and spent in opposing an initiated act?
______
Requested by: Sheffield Nelson, Chairman, Committee for a Fair Severance Tax
Opinion: There is no specific requirement in the Disclosure Act (ACA 7-9-401 et seq.) that private companies report how much they spend independently, unless they send money to a campaign committee. Rather, the statute requires disclosure when more than $500 is spent to advocate passage or defeat of a ballot question by “an individual person” or by a “public servant or governmental body.” The commission rules that the term “individual person” must be interpreted the same as the term “person,” which is defined in ACA 7-9-402(9) as including any individual, business, corporation or other organization or group acting in concert, and thus must file financial reports when more than five hundred dollars ($500) is spent for the purpose of expressly advocating the passage or defeat of a ballot question.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel.See Full Opinion
2008-EC-003Sloan3/19/2008
Elections (Campaign Finance; Debt Retirement). Question: May a candidate who has raised money to retire campaign debt from a previous election cycle deposit the funds directly into his or her personal bank account when the only debt from the prior campaign is owed to him or herself?
Requested by: Dan Greenberg, State Representative, Little Rock
Opinion: No.Arkansas election law (ACA 7-6-203I) and the Rules on Campaign Finance and Disclosure (Section 230) specifically require that a separate campaign account be maintained to receive and disburse funds to retire debt from previous campaigns.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief CounselSee Full Opinion
2008-EC-004Sloan
Legislators (Disclosure; Sales to State Entity). Question: Arkansas law requires members and members-elect of the General Assembly to disclose sales of goods or services in excess of $1,000 to any entity of the State of Arkansas by the member, his or her spouse, or any business in which the member or spouse have more than 10 percent interest (ACA 21-8-901). How is it determined if a sale must be disclosed?
Requested by: Advisory opinion.
Opinion: The sale of goods or service in excess of $1,000 must be disclosed if the sale is to an establishment of the state. Disclosure is not required of sales to private citizens that are paid for partially or in full by a state entity, such as a Medicaid payment for health care services or medications.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See Full Opinion
2008-EC-005Sloan
Political Action Committees (Issues Fund; PAC Registration Required). Question:The Arkansas Farm Bureau, contemplating the formation of an ”Issues Fund” consisting of voluntary contributions from its members that would be used to make contributions to advocacy groups supporting or opposing ballot questions and legislative questions, asks the following questions: 1) Since the fund would be specifically prohibited from direct contributions to candidates or public officials or making independent expenditures or contributions to independent expenditure committees, would contributions from the fund to ballot and legislative question committees trigger requirements for political action committee registration and reporting? 2) Must the name of the contemplated Issue Fund contain the words “political action committee” or the acronym “PAC”? 3) In reporting contributors to the Issue Fund, must individual contributions less than $500 be itemized?
Requested by: William A. Waddell, Jr., Attorney
Opinion: Yes, PAC registration and expenditure reporting would be required if contribution are made from the Issue Fund to ballot question committees or legislative question committees (ACA 7-6-201(1)A). The words political action committee or PAC are not required in the name of such a fund. The name and address of contributors must be itemized only when their contributions are in excess of $500 in the aggregate in any calendar year.
Author: Graham F. Sloan, Director See Full Opinion
2008-EC-006Sloan
Public Servants (Gift Reporting; Employee of the Year Awards). Question: May certain employees of the Game and Fish Commission selected annually as Employees of the Year accept a $5,000 award from the Campbell Award Trust, a non-profit, 501(c) charitable corporation?
Requested by: Scott Henderson, Director, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission
Opinion: Guidelines for the award state that the recipients are selected based upon “other attributes” related to community service and/or constituent service. Receipt of “gifts” by public servants is generally prohibited (ACA 21-8-801). However, this awards fits the exception to the gift rule provided at ACA 21-8-402(5)(B)(xv) for awards given in such a manner so as “not to result in or create the appearance of the employee using his or her position for private gain, giving preferential treatment to any person, or losing independence or impartiality.”
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See Full Opinion
2008-EC-007Sloan
Public Servants (Justices of the Peace; Payment for Marriage Ceremony). Question: Is it permissible for a Justice of the Peace to accept an honorarium for performing a marriage ceremony?
Requested by: Joan Cash, State Representative, Jonesboro
Opinion: State law prohibits public servants from receiving gifts or compensation for the performance of the duties of his or her office or position other than income and benefits from the governmental body by which employed (ACA 21-8-801). However, since state law defines a “gift” as the receipt of anything with value in excess of $100.00, the Commission opines that a Justice of the Peace may receive an honorarium for performing a marriage ceremony of up to $100.00.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See full opinion
2008-EC-008Sloan8/15/2008
Elections (Campaign Finance; Expenditure of Pub-lic Funds). Question: What triggers the requirement to report public funds spent by public servants and governmental bodies in advocating for or against public initiatives?
______
Requested by: Michael Cook, Chief of staff, Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Opinion: The filing requirement under the Disclosure Act for Public Initiatives, Referenda, and Measures Referred to Voters (ACA 7-9-401 et seq.) is triggered when funds spent “expressly advocating” for or against a ballot measure exceed $500. Activities and communication related to a ballot measure campaign that do not urge specific action (“expressly advocate” either way) is unregulated political speech and expenses related to such communication are not subject to disclosure. Also, general overhead expenses do not count toward the reporting threshold.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See full opinion
2008-EC-009Sloan
Public Servants (Ethics Commission; Service on other Boards and Commissions). Question: Are members of the Arkansas Ethics Commission prohibited from simultaneously serving on another state board or commission?
Requested by: Advisory opinion
Opinion: Members of the Arkansas Ethics Commission are in fact “government officials” by virtue of their authority to exercise regulatory powers and are therefore prohibited from service on other boards or commissions by state law [ACA 7-6-217(c)(1)].
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See full opinion
2008-EC-010Sloan
Public Servants (Campaign Activities; Use of Public Facilities). Question: Does ACA 7-1-103(a)(3)(A) serve to prevent a governmental entity from renting such things as rooms, tents, and equipment to a candidate for use in conjunction with a campaign event?
Requested by: Sen. Gilbert Baker, Conway
Opinion: That provision of state law prohibits a public servant from using public property for campaign purposes when the access to the property is acquired solely by virtue of the public servant’s position. However, it is permissible for the public servant to rent the facility if the room is regularly used by the public for such purposes and is equally available to all members of the public, without regard to political affiliation. Likewise, personal property such as tents or food service equipment owned by a public entity may be rented to a campaign so long as it is available for rental on an equal basis to members of the public and adequate consideration is paid by the renter.
Author: Rita S. Looney, Chief Counsel See full opinion
The Interim ServiceEC-1November 29, 2018