BY WESLEY YOUNG
SALISBURY POST

County Commissioner Frank Tadlock has sometimes jumped into the debate about billboards and sometimes held back.

Over the same period, Tadlock’s company, Frank Corriher Beef and Sausage, has leased five spaces for billboards – one of the billboards being within the area covered by county zoning regulations.

Tadlock says he plans to stay out of future discussions of billboard regulations, to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest.

That’s a good tack for Tadlock to take, an attorney for the N.C. Press Association told the Salisbury Post – even as some other commissioners appear to disagree about where to draw the line on conflict of interest.

Monday, Tadlock joined a discussion that led to the calling of a public hearing on whether to abolish county billboard regulations. Tadlock voted in favor of the public hearing.

‘‘I have some question about whether asking for a public hearing would be problem,’’ said Amanda Martin, attorney for the N.C. Press Association. ‘‘I don’t think I would go out on the limb to say he had broken the law.’’

Tadlock certainly took part in talks that led to the current billboard regulations, at a time when his company, Frank Corriher Beef and Sausage, was negotiating with Toby Outdoor Advertising to put up the five new billboards that stand on the Corriher property. Tadlock is the president of the company, and though he owns no stock in it, his wife, Sue, is the daughter of owner Frank Corriher.

Tadlock even had a representative of the billboard company, Jim Troy, come talk to the board about billboard regulations, although Tadlock didn’t announce the business deal in the offing.

‘‘I looked at that as another item of business pertaining to zoning,’’ Tadlock said this week. ‘‘I never looked at it as to whether it would be good or bad for the Frank Corriher company ... He (Troy) just happened to be one person who was available. What he had interest in was China Grove’s (zoning territory). That never crossed my mind’’ as to whether the discussion would be a conflict of interest, or that his company would benefit by the board’s decision.

Troy’s company recently put up five billboards on the Corriher property. The billboards are 1,000 feet apart, and all but one of them stands within the China Grove zoning district. The new billboards are on the west side of the interstate. Four old billboards stand on the east side on Corriher property.

The laws governing conflict of interest forbid a public official from making a contract to his own benefit – and that law keeps Corriher from selling products to the county jail, for instance.

The law also governs the voting of county commissioners on matters that involve their own financial interest. The statute says that a board of county commissioners may allow a member to excuse himself from voting in case of his own financial interest.

Fleming Bell, who wrote the book on ethics for North Carolina public officials, says in his book it is debatable whether the law requires or merely allows a board to excuse a member from voting.

The safest course, he says in ‘‘Ethics, Conflicts and Offices,’’ is to treat the conflict of interest provision as a requirement rather than an option. Bell, who works at the N.C. Institute of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, was not available for comment this week.

Tadlock did get leave to abstain on a board vote in January that granted a variance for the billboard within the county’s zoning jurisdiction. The Toby billboard company sought the variance because the county’s height limit on billboards – 40 feet – was 10 feet lower than the limit within China Grove.

Monday, Commissioner Dave Rowland said Tadlock should not take part in any votes on billboard rules, although Rowland had no problem with Tadlock voting merely to grant a public hearing.

But Commissioner Steve Blount sees no conflict for Tadlock to take part in billboard discussions. Blount sees a difference between conflict of interest, in which one has‘‘benefited directly,’’ and ‘‘a prejudiced view of the issue’’ that one may have arising from one’s involvement.

‘‘Let’s say the county was dealing with a sludge ordinance, and it would have an impact on farms,’’ Blount said. ‘‘Frank, being a farmer, would have some deep concerns over the language of that ordinance, to make sure it didn’t hurt farmers in general (and) himself in particular. That is not a conflict but a prejudice.’’

Blount thinks the board can benefit by listening to members with professional expertise in an area the board is thinking of regulating. If the board was thinking of regulating mechanical contractors, Blount said, he would expect commissioners to want to hear his views and those of Newton Cohen, the other mechanical contractor who sits on the board.

‘‘You would want to hear from us so that we could give you the value of that knowledge,’’ Blount said.

If being in a business keeps a board member from voting on any regulation that affects the business, Blount said, Rowland should excuse himself from any discussion that might affect subdivisions. Rowland is a real estate developer.

According to the Press Association’s attorney, there’s no reason a developer like Rowland can’t take part in votes on general development issues.

Rowland said this morning that the only tract he has under development is within the city of Salisbury’s jurisdiction. Prior to that, he developed land on Peeler Road, but obtained his permits before zoning went into effect.

‘‘I think if it has got any direct effect on what you are doing or what you have planned for the near future, you ought to pull out of it,’’ Rowland said. He doesn’t think Tadlock was wrong to bring Troy in two years ago to talk to the board, but thinks Tadlock must now step back.

‘‘If Frank insisted on voting on the ordinance at this point in history, I don’t think that would be right,’’ Rowland said.

‘‘My suspicion is that he (Rowland) will more frequently have conflicts than the others,’’ Martin said. ‘‘It depends on whether he has a current project that is affected or not’’ by the board vote.

For instance, a developer who sits on a board should exclude himself from discussion of tax breaks for developing run down areas, if he has a project under way to do just that.