MS 2021-05-J-Scanlon-May-3-2021-Nepotism-and-Hiring-of-Mayors-Grandson-in-City-Parks-and-Re May 3, 2021

Does Mississippi's nepotism law block a city from hiring the mayor's grandson as a parks-department laborer?

Short answer: The 2021 opinion concluded that Mississippi's nepotism statute (§ 25-1-53) was not violated when the Ridgeland Board of Aldermen hired the mayor's grandson as a parks-and-recreation laborer. The statute reaches only five specific positions (officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy, assistant). A laborer is none of those. The AG noted ethics-commission review was still recommended for any conflict-of-interest concerns.

Disclaimer: This is an official Mississippi Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Mississippi attorney for advice on your specific situation.

Plain-English summary

Ridgeland's city attorney asked whether the city could hire the mayor's grandson (a relative within the third degree) as a laborer in the Parks and Recreation Department. Section 25-1-53, Mississippi's nepotism statute, prohibits public officials from appointing or employing a relative within the third degree as "an officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy or assistant."

The AG applied the standard three-part test (relationship within third degree, relative is the appointing authority, position is one of the five enumerated positions). The third prong was the dispositive one: a "laborer" is not one of the five enumerated positions in the statute. So the nepotism statute didn't apply, and the hire was permissible.

The opinion cited multiple prior AG opinions on the laborer-not-included point (Gilfoy 1993, Blackmon 2010, Gifford 1999), confirming the consistent reading. The AG closed with the standard pointer to the State Ethics Commission for any conflict-of-interest review under the ethics-in-government law.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2021. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

What the opinion said for each audience, at the time

For Mississippi cities making hiring decisions in 2021

The five-position list in § 25-1-53 is exclusive. Positions outside that list were not nepotism-statute concerns, even if a relative of an elected official applied. Common municipal jobs outside the statute's reach included:
- Laborers (per this opinion and earlier ones)
- Maintenance workers
- Equipment operators
- Truck drivers
- Most field positions in public works, parks, sanitation, etc.

Positions inside the statute's reach included:
- Officers (police officers, code enforcement officers, etc.)
- Clerks (city clerk, court clerk)
- Stenographers
- Deputies (deputy clerks, deputy administrators)
- Assistants (assistant city manager, assistant city attorney, etc.)

For mayors and other elected officials with relatives seeking municipal jobs

In 2021, an elected official's relative could be hired into a non-enumerated position without statutory violation. The relative still had to qualify on the merits, and the elected official should still avoid playing any role in the hiring decision (the appointing-authority prong matters when both the relative and the elected official are connected to the hiring process).

For citizens watching municipal hiring practices

The 2021 framework allowed for what some might call "nepotism light": relatives of elected officials could be hired into rank-and-file jobs even though the statute targeted higher-profile positions. The legislative judgment was apparently that the corruption risks at the laborer level were lower than at the officer/deputy/assistant level. Citizens concerned about appearance issues had recourse through the State Ethics Commission and, ultimately, the ballot box.

For ethics commission filers and county attorneys

Even when the nepotism statute did not apply, the broader ethics-in-government law could still be implicated, especially if the elected official supervised the relative or participated in evaluating the relative's work. The AG's pointer to the Ethics Commission was a reminder that statutory non-violation didn't end the analysis.

Common questions

Q: Why does the statute only cover five positions?
A: Mississippi's nepotism statute is one of the older anti-corruption provisions in state law. Its drafters specified five positions (officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy, assistant) that they viewed as the most likely targets of self-dealing. Manual or labor positions weren't included, perhaps because they were viewed as less prestigious or less subject to manipulation. The legislature could expand the list, but as of 2021 it had not.

Q: What's "third degree of consanguinity" in this context?
A: Civil-law computation:
- 1st degree: parent, child
- 2nd degree: grandparent, grandchild, sibling
- 3rd degree: great-grandparent, great-grandchild, aunt/uncle, niece/nephew

A grandson is a 2nd-degree relative, well within the statute's third-degree reach. So the relationship prong was satisfied; the laborer-position prong was not.

Q: What if the laborer position involves supervisory duties?
A: If the position is functionally a supervisor or assistant supervisor, even though titled "laborer," there's a real argument it falls within the statute. The AG opinions look at substance over form when the title is borderline. A "laborer" who is really an assistant in disguise might trigger the statute.

Q: Does this rule apply to county hires too?
A: Yes. Section 25-1-53 applies to "any state, county, district or municipal office." So county supervisors hiring nephews as road crew workers face the same analysis: laborer is not in the five-position list, no violation.

Q: Can the mayor's grandson get a promotion later?
A: A subsequent promotion to one of the enumerated positions (e.g., from laborer to "deputy parks director") would trigger the analysis at the time of promotion. If the grandfather is still mayor at that point and is involved in the promotion decision, the statute would apply.

Q: What about ethics issues?
A: Mississippi's ethics-in-government law (Title 25, Chapter 4) has separate rules on conflicts of interest. A close family member of an elected official working for the same governmental unit could create conflict-of-interest issues even when the nepotism statute does not apply. The Ethics Commission is the right place to seek guidance.

Background and statutory framework

Mississippi's nepotism statute, § 25-1-53, dates to early 20th-century anti-machine reforms. Its core targets were the patronage hiring practices common in earlier eras: an official appointing relatives to high-profile positions in the same department. The five enumerated positions reflect the typical job categories in a city or county office of that era: officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy, assistant.

The three-part test from the 1993 Gilfoy AG opinion has remained the operating framework: relationship, appointing authority, position. All three must be satisfied for the statute to bar an appointment. The opinions cited here (Gilfoy, Blackmon 2010, Gifford 1999) consistently applied the test to find that laborer-type positions are outside the statute.

The State Ethics Commission's parallel jurisdiction matters in practice. Section 25-4-105 prohibits certain financial relationships between public officials and entities they supervise, and bars self-dealing. Family relationships between elected officials and government employees can implicate these rules even when the nepotism statute does not. Cities and counties handling such hires usually consult both the statute and the Ethics Commission.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- Miss. Code Ann. § 25-1-53, Mississippi nepotism statute, prohibition limited to five enumerated positions

Prior AG opinions cited:
- MS AG Op., Gilfoy (Aug. 26, 1993), three-part nepotism test; laborer not enumerated
- MS AG Op., Blackmon (Mar. 19, 2010), laborer not within statute
- MS AG Op., Gifford, Jr. (Feb. 26, 1999), same

Source

Original opinion text

May 3, 2021

John P. Scanlon, Esq.
Attorney for the City of Ridgeland
800 Avery Boulevard North, Suite 101
Ridgeland, Mississippi 39157

Re: Nepotism and Hiring of Mayor's Grandson in City Parks and Recreation Department

Dear Mr. Scanlon:

The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Issue Presented

Would Mississippi's nepotism statute be violated by the City of Ridgeland Board of Aldermen (the "Board") employing the Mayor's grandson as a laborer in the Parks and Recreation Department?

Brief Response

No. There will be no violation of Mississippi's nepotism statute by the Board employing the Mayor's grandson as a laborer in the Parks and Recreation Department because a laborer is not one of the five employment positions enumerated in Section 25-1-53.

Applicable Law and Discussion

Mississippi Code Annotated Section 25-1-53, Mississippi's nepotism statute, provides, in pertinent part:

It shall be unlawful for any person elected, appointed or selected in any manner whatsoever to any state, county, district or municipal office, or for any board of trustees of any state institution, to appoint or employ, as an officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy or assistant who is to be paid out of the public funds, any person related by blood or marriage within the third degree, computed by the rule of the civil law, to the person or any member of the board of trustees having the authority to make such appointment or contract such employment as employer.

In describing the analysis required to determine whether a violation of Mississippi's nepotism statute has occurred, this office has opined in the following manner:

In determining whether the nepotism statute applies, it is necessary to apply a three-part analysis. One, are the parties related within the third degree? Two, is the relative who is a public official the appointing authority? Three, is the position one of the five enunciated positions in the statute? If the answer to any one of these questions is no, the nepotism statute does not prohibit the appointment or employment of the individual in question.

MS AG Op., Gilfoy at *1 (Aug. 26, 1993) (emphasis added).

Section 25-1-53 prohibits a board of aldermen from hiring a person who is related by blood or marriage within the third degree to one of only five specific positions: officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy or assistant. You state that the Mayor's grandson applied to be a "laborer" in the Parks and Recreation Department. This office has repeatedly opined that a laborer is not one of the five positions specified in the nepotism statute. See, e.g., MS AG Op., Gilfoy at 1 (Aug. 26, 1993); MS AG Op., Blackmon at 2 (Mar. 19, 2010); MS AG Op., Gifford, Jr. at *1 (Feb. 26, 1999).

Because the position, a laborer, is not one of the five enunciated positions within Section 25-1-53, the answer to one of the three questions set forth above is "no." Accordingly, there will be no violation of Mississippi's nepotism statute by the Board employing the Mayor's grandson as a laborer in the Parks and Recreation Department.

Notably, we invite you to consult the Mississippi Ethics Commission regarding any potential conflicts of interest, governed by Mississippi's Ethics in Government Law.

If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL

By: /s/ Gregory Alston
Gregory Alston
Special Assistant Attorney General