NYCL AGO 95-35.

• Case Date: July 03, 1995
• Court: New York

New York Attorney General Opinions 1995. AGO 95-35. July 3, 1995Informal Opinion No. 95-35William J. Better, Esq. County Attorney County of Columbia 401 State Street Hudson, NY 12534A person may not serve simultaneously as a member of the board of supervisors and as the social welfare examiner of Columbia County.Dear Mr. Better: You have asked whether a person may serve simultaneously as a member of the board of supervisors of Columbia County (the legislative body) and as a social welfare examiner of the Columbia County Department of Social Services. You have indicated that there are 23 members of the board of supervisors, including the individual in question who serves as supervisor for a ward in the City of Hudson. He was elected to that position in November 1993 for a two-year term, expiring on December 31, 1995. This individual was hired as social welfare examiner on March 6, 1995 after a competitive civil service examination. The social welfare examiner determines financial eligibility for programs administered by the local social services department in accordance with State regulations. You have informed us that the social welfare examiner is supervised on a day-to-day basis by a senior or principal social welfare examiner who in turn is supervised by the director of income maintenance. The commissioner of the department of social services has ultimate responsibility for the operations of the county department of social services. The commissioner is appointed for a specific term in accordance with the Social Services Law. Social welfare examiners fall within a collective bargaining agreement which covers their terms and conditions of employment. You have indicated that the subject individual does not sit on the committee of the legislative body which deals with the department of social services. He has announced his intention not to seek reelection when his term expires on December 31, 1995. 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...