Request By:
Honorable Philip Taliaferro
Attorney at Law
Suite 400 Grand Savings Bldg.
1 West Sixth Street
Covington, Kentucky 41011
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Walter C. Herdman, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
This is in answer to your letter of January 12 in which you raise the question as to whether or not your position as Chairman of the State Personnel Board would preclude you from accepting a federal grant (if offered) pursuant to an application made to the Kentucky Heritage Commission for a historical grant to restore certain property owned by you located in a historical zone. More specifically, your question involved the following:
"I had made application for a historical grant for property that I own at 502 Greenup Street, Covington, Kentucky. This property is located in a historical zone. I am enclosing copies of the application. It is my intention to restore the building and use it as my law office. The grant is a federal one, but it is administered through and granted by the Kentucky Heritage Commission, a State Commission. Would my position as Chairman of the State Personnel Board preclude me from accepting a grant if it was offered? Is there any reason whatsoever why I should withdraw my application at this time? While my research indicates that there is no legal or ethical conflict, I would like for you to advise me whether there was any impropriety or even any appearance of impropriety in this application."
We find nothing under the state conflict of interest act, particularly KRS 61.096, that would any way affect your acceptance of the federal grant in question; neither do we find anything under KRS 61.190 prohibiting public officers from receiving profits from public funds. This statute relates more specifically to so-called "kick-backs" mentioned in the following cases:
A & W Equipment Co. v. Carroll, Ky., 377 S.W.2d 895 (1964); and
Fanelli v. Commonwealth, Ky., 418 S.W.2d 704 (1967).
There is always the possibility of the existence of a common law conflict of interest, but in your particular case, we cannot readily conceive of one. Such a conflict is generally held to exist whenever a public officer enters into a contract, the execution of which may make it possible for his personal interest to become antagonistic to his faithful discharge of his public duty, in which case such an agreement would be void as against public policy. See