Trustee recuses; Rhinebeck trustees adopt resolution allowing liaison role with disclosure and conditions

Deputy Mayor Rick Lewitt said the board would consider a resolution about Trustee Slabby’s outside employment and asked the trustee to recuse; Trustee Slabby announced she was leaving the room and said, “I am recusing myself from this conversation. I am for the record leaving the room.”

The board reviewed a resolution vetted by village counsel and the village ethics committee that addresses Trustee Slabby’s part‑time employment at Gordon Spencson, the firm that serves as the village’s land‑use counsel. The ethics committee concluded that, under specified conditions, Trustee Slabby’s employment did not create a financial conflict because she performs no village work for the firm and receives no compensation attributable to village matters. The resolution would reappoint Gordon Spencson as land‑use counsel and require public acknowledgment of Trustee Slabby’s relationship when the firm appears at public meetings.

Trustees debated the legal conclusion and the optics. One trustee said, “It’s hard to see how there isn’t some kind of conflict even if there isn’t a financial relationship,” raising concerns about the appearance of impropriety and asking whether the policy provides sufficient safeguards. Proponents noted the ethics opinion and said Trustee Slabby does not have decisionmaking authority on village matters and that existing barriers and disclosures aim to separate her village duties from her employment.

After discussion, the board voted to adopt the resolution permitting Trustee Slabby to continue as the village’s land‑use liaison with the conditions and disclosures recommended by the ethics committee and as described in the resolution. The motion carried. Trustee Slabby returned to the meeting after the vote.

The resolution, as read during the meeting, includes four primary points: public disclosure of the employment relationship; a finding of no compensable village work performed for the firm; the firm’s continued appointment as land‑use counsel; and a requirement that the trustee publicly acknowledge her employment relationship whenever the firm appears at a public meeting. Trustees said they would be prepared to respond if members of the public raise further questions about the arrangement.

The board did not specify additional monitoring or enforcement steps beyond the ethics committee’s recommendations; the resolution and the ethics committee letter were placed in trustees’ packets, and the ethics committee’s letter was described as privileged.