1996-7
View/download document
Cite as N.Y. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 1996-7
REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW §§ 1402, 1408, 1420.
The positions of mayor of a village and member of the town
board of assessment review are incompatible where the village
uses the town assessment roll and the town board of assessment
review hears grievances on behalf of the village and the town.
March 4, 1996
Richard J. Zwirn, Esq.
Informal Opinion
Town Attorney
No. 96-7
Town of Moravia
P. O. Box 631
Moravia, NY 13118
Dear Mr. Zwirn:
You have asked whether the positions of member of the town
board of assessment review and mayor of a village within the town
are compatible and, therefore, may be held simultaneously by the
same person.
In the absence of a constitutional or statutory prohibition
against dual-officeholding, one person may hold two offices
simultaneously unless they are incompatible. The leading case on
compatibility of office is People ex rel. Ryan v Green, 58 NY 295
(1874). In that case the Court held that two offices are
incompatible if one is subordinate to the other or if there is an
inherent inconsistency between the two offices. The former can
be characterized as "you cannot be your own boss", a status
readily identifiable. The latter is not easily characterized,
for one must analyze the duties of the two offices to ascertain
whether there is an inconsistency. An obvious example is the
inconsistency of holding both the office of auditor and the
office of director of finance.
There are two subsidiary aspects of compatibility. One is
that, although the common law rule of the Ryan case is limited to
public offices, the principle equally covers an office and a
position of employment or two positions of employment. The other
is that, although the positions are compatible, a situation may
arise where one has a conflict of interests created by the
simultaneous holding of the two positions. In such a situation,
the conflict is avoided by declining to participate in the
disposition of the matter.
2
You have informed us that the town assessment roll is used
by the village and that the town board of assessment review
determines real property assessment grievances on behalf of the
town and the village. Real Property Tax Law § 1402.
You believe that there is a conflict between the duties of
these two positions in that when the mayor as a member of the
board of assessment review reduces assessments for village
taxpayers a shortfall will occur in revenue projections under the
village budget. We do not see this as a source of conflict in
that taxes are not levied for the ensuing year until after the
completed and verified assessment roll is filed with the village
clerk, reflecting any reductions by the board of assessment
review. Id., §§ 1408, 1420. The tax rates would then be set by
the village board of trustees so that revenue projections in the
budget are achieved taking into consideration the assessed
valuation of village property.
We do, however, see a conflict of duties in the holding of
these two positions. The mayor, as a member of the board of
assessment review, would hear grievances by both village
taxpayers and taxpayers who reside in the area of the town
outside the village. We believe that this creates a conflict in
that the mayor may favor village grievants to the detriment of
taxpayers residing outside the village. The mayor's loyalties
are divided between village taxpayers, whom he serves as the
chief executive officer of the village, and his duty to review
impartially all grievances as a member of the board of assessment
review. The favoring of village taxpayers would result in the
payment of lower town taxes by these individuals as compared to
residents of the town outside the village. While the mayor may
perform his or her duties on the board of assessment review in a
fair and impartial manner, the appearance of impropriety in
holding these two positions cannot, in our view, be avoided. In
order to maintain public confidence in government, even the
appearance that governmental functions are not being performed
solely in the public interest must be avoided.
We conclude that the positions of mayor of a village and
member of the town board of assessment review are incompatible
where the village uses the town assessment roll and the town
board of assessment review hears grievances on behalf of the
village and the town.
The Attorney General renders formal opinions only to
officers and departments of State government. This perforce is
an informal and unofficial expression of the views of this
office.
Very truly yours,
3
JAMES D. COLE
Assistant Attorney General
in Charge of Opinions