Ethics Board Agrees on Possible Changes to Its Code Regarding Nepotism, Uniforms

After weeks of debate around the nepotism case regarding the son of Village of Mamaroneck Trustee Louis Santoro, the Board of Ethics has agreed that the family member of an elected official should only be allowed to work for the village (regardless of whether it is on a part-time, seasonal, full-time or permanent basis) if he or she is hired before the official's election.

"This was something that the Ethics Board addressed in the Santoro son decision," said Ethics Board Chair Charles Mitchell in an email. "Our thought is that although such a hiring may, at its foundation have no impropriety, it lends itself to appearances of impropriety."

Moreover, the board concluded that the relatives of any employee should not be allowed to work for the village if they meet any of the requirements listed in the nepotism section of the code (§21-4, subsection E).

*Note that the code has two different definitions for "immediate family member" and "relatives."

Currently, the code allows employees' relatives to work for the village under the circumstances cited in the code if it is not on a full-time basis, and elected officials' family members to work for the village if they become a family member of the official after being hired.

The Santoro case, which was resolved in July, came about after Trustee Santoro's son was hired by the village to perform a seasonal job with the Department of Public Works. The Board of Ethics began an investigation and determined that the hiring violated neither the Village Code, nor the New York General Municipal Law.

Striving to clear the ambiguity surrounding this case and others like it, the Ethics Board also suggested substituting "minor child" with "children" in the definition of "immediate family member" in the code.

At the meeting, the board also discussed a section in the code that does not allow village officers or employees to wear a village-issued uniform while off-duty. This clause has long baffled fire and police officers, who object the fact that they may break the code by wearing a uniform during funerals or parades.

The Board of Ethics suggested allowing dress uniforms to be worn at officially sanctioned meetings or events. This would still prevent a DPW employee, for example, from wearing a village uniform while off-duty, which was a concern of the board.

The changes mentioned above would have to be approved by the Board of Trustees before going into effect.

The board also mentioned that they would create a Frequently Asked Questions section addressing these and other points, including misconceptions regarding the board's stand on village officials shopping from village businesses. The board expects the village manager to send out a memo with regard to this issue.