Developers and property owners are entitled to have their applications for zoning changes or permits decided by members of zoning and planning boards based solely on the merits of the application, free of any bias, predisposition, or self-interest. Indeed, community members and society at large also are vitally interested in having local officials make land use decisions fairly, and with the best interest of the community in mind. Although state law sets forth a variety of prohibited family and business relationships and financial interests,1 and although local towns and villages often have ethics rules that are even more stringent than the state law,2 in many instances it can be surprisingly difficult to determine whether a particular official’s decisions can be challenged on conflict of interest grounds.
In those situations, resolution of questions of conflict of interest requires a case-by-case examination of the relevant facts and circumstances.3 Moreover, not every conflict of interest is sufficient enough to warrant recusal.4 In one case, for example, a court refused to invalidate the decision of a town planning board, notwithstanding that the chairperson of the board had a business relationship with one of the principals of the applicant seeking subdivision approval that amounted to, at most, .15 percent of his company’s gross sales; the court found that the likelihood that such a “de minimis” interest would or did in fact influence the chairperson’s judgment or impair the discharge of his official duties was “little more than speculative.”5
General Municipal Law §809
