Mississippi Advisory Opinions October 15, 1999: AGO 000013450 (October 15, 1999)
Collection: Mississippi Attorney General Opinions
Docket: AGO 000013450
Date: Oct. 15, 1999
Advisory Opinion Text
AGO 000013450.
DOCK 1999-0447
AUTH Mike Lanford
DATE 19991015
RQNM Joseph Meadows
SUBJ Elections - Managers
SBCD 69-A
TEXT Joseph R. Meadows, Esquire
Harrison County Board Attorney
P. O. Drawer 550
Gulfport, MS 39502
Dear Mr. Meadows:
Attorney General Mike Moore has received your request for an opinion and has assigned it to me for research and reply. Your letter asks the following questions:
Does the fact that a member of the Executive Committee of the Harrison County Democratic Party has taken a leave of absence from the Executive Committee during the time in which the individual performed duties in the primary election for the Democratic Party held on August 3, 1999, qualify this person for payment of such services?
In response, we find no statutory authority for members of the Executive Committee to be compensated by the county for performing their duties with regard to conducting primary elections. The fact that a member of the Executive Committee may have taken a "leave of absence" makes no difference. MS AG Op. Kruger (June 1, 1988).
Would the payment of the requested claim made by the Chairman of the Harrison County Democratic Executive Committee for services rendered [by his wife] in preparing for and conducting the first primary election for the Democratic Party held on August 3, 1999, in any way violate the nepotism statute found at MCA Section 25-1-53, et seq.?
In response, Section 25-1-53 of the Mississippi Code prohibits a person holding a state or county office from appointing the person related to him by blood or marriage within the third degree to the positions of "officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy or assistant". The Chairman of the Harrison County Democratic Executive Committee does not appear to be a "county officer" as that term is used in the statute. Further, it does not appear that this person's wife was employed as a "officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy or assistant". Therefore, we do not see a violation of the nepotism statute under the facts stated. However, any claim for payment should be made by the person entitled thereto, not that person's spouse.
Very truly yours,
MIKE MOORE
ATTORNEY GENERAL
By: Mike Lanford
Deputy Attorney General
ML:sm
Enclosure