When a village mayor works full time for the county sheriff's department, can he vote on a contract that would shift village policing to the sheriff?

Plain-English summary

The Village of Attica was considering a contract with Wyoming County under which the Sheriff's Department would take over law enforcement for the village. If the contract went through, the village would disband its own Police Department. The Mayor of Attica worked full time as a Technical Sheriff in the Sheriff's Department. A trustee on the Village Board asked the AG whether the Mayor could participate in negotiating or voting on the contract.

The AG said no, and pointed to two specific conflict vectors. The Mayor's day job sat inside the agency that stood to receive new responsibilities, additional funds, and additional resources from the contract. Money flowing into the Sheriff's Department could affect the terms and conditions of employment of the Mayor and his colleagues. On the village side, the Mayor's responsibility to Attica taxpayers was to weigh impartially whether to continue running the village Police Department or to contract for sheriff services, and to negotiate hard on price. Holding both interests in the same head created at least the appearance of divided loyalties.

The AG drew on Taxpayers' Association v Town Board, 69 AD2d 320 (2d Dept 1979), and on the office's own prior opinions (Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 86-54), which recognized the pressures that public officials face when they sit in front of their own employer's incoming revenue. The conclusion was that the Mayor should recuse himself from negotiating and voting on the proposed contract. The opinion did not decide whether the Mayor could continue holding both positions.

The AG reiterated its long-running principle that even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided in order to maintain public confidence in government, citing Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 97-5.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. 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.

Common questions

Does the opinion decide whether the Mayor may keep both positions?

No. It addresses his participation in the proposed contract with the county Sheriff's Department. The AG concluded he should recuse from negotiating and voting on that contract; it did not analyze the general compatibility of the two positions.

Why did the AG see a conflict?

The proposed contract would give the Sheriff's Department additional duties, funds, and resources, potentially affecting the Mayor's terms of employment there. As Mayor, he was responsible for representing village taxpayers and weighing whether the village should retain its police department or contract for sheriff services.

Does the opinion address part-time sheriff employment or board quorum after recusal?

No. It describes a Mayor employed full time as a Technical Sheriff and gives no opinion on different employment arrangements or the Village Board's quorum rules.

What participation did the AG say the Mayor should avoid?

The opinion says he should recuse himself from negotiations and voting on the proposed contract. It does not separately discuss other conduct.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion cites Taxpayers' Association v Town Board and an earlier AG opinion for the pressures placed on employees in this situation. It says the Mayor's interests conflict or at least create an appearance of divided loyalties, and it cites another AG opinion for the importance of avoiding even the appearance of impropriety.

Citations

• Taxpayers' Association v Town Board, 69 AD2d 320 (2d Dept 1979) (Second Department conflict-of-interests precedent).
• Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 86-54 (recognition of pressures on public-officer-employees).
• Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 97-5 (avoidance of even the appearance of impropriety).

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/I_98-34_pw.pdf

Original opinion text

The mayor of a village, who is employed full time as a technical sheriff in the county sheriff's department, has a conflict of interests in negotiating or voting on a proposed contract with the county for the provision of law enforcement services by the sheriff's department to the village.

July 10, 1998

Timothy E. Moran, Esq.
Village Attorney
Village of Attica
P. O. Box 268
Attica, NY 14011

Informal Opinion
No. 98-34

Dear Mr. Moran:
You have informed us that the Village of Attica plans to negotiate with Wyoming County to have the Sheriff's Department provide law enforcement services by contract to the Village. If the contract is agreed to, the Village will disband its Police Department. The Mayor of the Village is employed full time as a Technical Sheriff in the County Sheriff's Department. As a member of the Village Board, you inquire whether the Mayor has a conflict of interests in negotiating or voting on a proposed contract with the County for the provision of law enforcement services by the Sheriff's Department to the Village. In our view, the Mayor should abstain from participating in negotiations and voting on the proposed contract. As a member of the Board of Trustees of the Village and a full-time employee of the Sheriff's Department, the Mayor has an actual or perceived conflict of interests. Decisional law and opinions of this office have recognized the pressures that are placed on employees in situations of this nature. Taxpayers' Association v Town Board, 69 AD2d 320 (2d Dept 1979); Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 86-54. The proposed contract would provide additional responsibilities, funds and resources to the Sheriff's Department. Also, the additional funds could affect the terms and conditions of employment of the Technical Sheriff and his colleagues in the Sheriff's Department. On the other hand, the Mayor's responsibility as a member of the Village Board of Trustees is to represent the interests of Village taxpayers. In this role, his responsibility is to obtain effective law enforcement services at a reasonable cost. Also, he must weigh impartially whether to continue the Village Police Department or contract for the Sheriff's services. These interests conflict or at least create

2
an appearance of divided loyalties interfering with the ability of the Mayor to take action solely in the interests of Village residents and taxpayers. In opinions of the Attorney General, we have emphasized that even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided in order to maintain public confidence in government. Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 97-5. In our view, the Mayor should recuse himself from participating in the negotiation and voting on the proposed contract. 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