Request By:
Mr. Jimmie W. Greene
McCreary County Judge/Executive
Courthouse
Whitley City, Kentucky 42653
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
You request our opinion on two questions. The underlying facts and questions in your letter read:
"The McCreary County Fiscal Court advertised and received one (1) bid for providing insurance coverage on county road equipment (dozers, rollers, graders, etc.). At the opening of the bid in the fiscal court's last session the question arose as to possible conflict since our county attorney is a stockholder of the insurance agency which submitted the bid. Additionally, we currently carry insurance coverage with another local agency in which our county treasurer is a stockholder.
"Therefore, an 'Attorney General's Opinion' is requested on the following questions:
"a. Does 'Conflict of Interest' exist if county purchases coverage from an agency in which the county attorney (elected official) is a stockholder? and,
"b. Does 'Conflict of Interest' exist if county treasurer (appointed official) is stockholder in agency providing insurance coverage to the county?"
Addressing the treasurer question first, the basic duty of the county treasurer is to receive and receipt for all money due the county and paid into the county treasury, and to disburse such money in such manner and for such purpose as may be authorized by fiscal court. KRS 68.020. The treasurer has nothing to do with the determination of the insurance coverage on county equipment. Thus we see no conflict of interest in the situation, assuming the treasurer took no affirmative action contributing to the award.
As relates to the county attorney, and assuming that as legal adviser to the fiscal court (see KRS 69.210) he did not advise that body to either accept or reject the bid and assuming that he took no part in the bid award transaction by way of his discussion or advice, and took no affirmative action contributing to the award, it is our opinion that no conflict of interest is involved.
If the county attorney did have some input of any kind, as a result of his positive actions, into the insurance award, then the question is what interest does he have in the company as a stockholder? The basic principle is that he who is entrusted with the business of others cannot be allowed to make such business an object of profit to himself. However, the interest in the insurance company would not be sufficient to disqualify him, under these assumed facts, if the opportunity for self-benefit is a mere possibility or is so remote or collateral that it cannot be reasonably calculated to affect his judgment or conduct in the making of the contract. Commonwealth v. Withers, 266 Ky. 29, 98 S.W.2d 24 (1936) 25, 26. In other words, suppose that the county attorney engaged in some overt act which contributed to the insurance award. Then as to whether he created a conflict of interest would depend upon whether his pecuniary or proprietary interest was such that he stood to gain or lose something by way of such an award. Only the courts are equipped to make a determination on the latter point.