1996-20
View/download document
Cite as N.Y. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 1996-20
GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW § 239-m(3)(a)(iv), (b); TOWN LAW §§ 261,
267-b; VILLAGE LAW, ART 7.
The mayor of a village may serve also as the chairperson of
a town zoning board of appeals, but must recuse himself or
herself from acting on the zoning board of appeals with respect
to matters that affect the interests of the village or village
residents.
June 26, 1996
Robert A. Green, Esq.
Informal Opinion
Village Attorney
No. 96-20
Village of Bellport
P.O. Box 3
Bellport, New York 11713-2522
Dear Mr. Green:
You have asked whether the mayor of your village may serve
simultaneously as the chairperson of the town zoning board of
appeals of the town in which the village is located.
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.
In our view, these positions are not incompatible. In that
the offices are in two separate governmental units, one is not
subordinate to the other and the potential for a conflict of
duties is limited. Towns are authorized to enact zoning
regulations including the establishment of a zoning board of
2
appeals, but these regulations apply only in the part of the town
that is outside any incorporated village or city. Town Law
§ 261. Villages are authorized to enact their own zoning
regulations. Village Law, Art 7.
Zoning boards of appeals are authorized to grant use
variances and area variances and review determinations made by
enforcement officials. Town Law § 267-b. It is conceivable that
an action taken by the town zoning board of appeals will affect
village interests. For example, a request for a variance near
village boundaries may be opposed by village residents. Where
this is the case, the mayor should recuse himself or herself from
acting as a member of the town zoning board of appeals. As
mayor, he or she will have divided loyalties which may affect the
making of an impartial decision, considering only applicable
legal standards. The mayor, as the elected executive and a
member of the village board of trustees, has a strong interest in
representing village residents. In any event, even the
appearance of a conflict should be avoided in order to maintain
public confidence in government. Recusal is an adequate remedy
in these circumstances.
We conclude that the mayor of a village may serve also as
the chairperson of a town zoning board of appeals, but must
recuse himself or herself from acting on the zoning board of
appeals with respect to matters that affect the interests of the
village or village residents.
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,
JAMES D. COLE
Assistant Attorney General
In Charge of Opinions