NYCL AGO 95-13.

Case DateFebruary 08, 1995
CourtNew York
New York Attorney General Opinions 1995. AGO 95-13. February 8, 1995Informal Opinion No. 95-13Paul H. Tocker, Esq. Deputy Corporation Counsel City of Schenectady City Hall, Rm. 201 Schenectady, NY 12305-1938GENERAL CITY LAW § 27; GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW § 234; MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW § 11(2)(a).The appointment by the mayor of the City of Schenectady of members of the planning commission, subject to confirmation by the city council, is not inconsistent with provisions of State law.Dear Mr. Tocker: You have asked whether provisions of the Schenectady City Code, subjecting the appointment by the mayor of members of the city planning commission to confirmation by the city council, is consistent with provisions of State law. You have indicated that under the City Code appointments to the planning commission are required to conform with section 234 of the General Municipal Law and section 27 of the General City Law. Under section 234, an ordinance or resolution creating a city planning commission
shall specify the public officer or body of said municipality that shall appoint such commissioners.
In our view, this language is simply a requirement that the method of appointment be included in the resolution or ordinance. The logical alternatives are appointment by an officer or board, thus their inclusion in the statute. By its terms, section 234 does not prohibit an appointment subject to confirmation. In any event, when an appointment is made by an executive and ratified by the legislative body, the appointment is considered to be made by the executive. See, 1974 Op Atty Gen (Inf) 204; Op Atty Gen (Inf) No. 90-70. Under section 27(1) of the General City Law,
[m]embers and
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT