AVON — Avon Town Judge Michael Torregiano has been censured by the State of New York Commission on Judicial Conduct after a bitter argument over his salary during which he cited a favorable ruling for a Town Board Member’s daughter over a speeding ticket as reason for a higher salary.
According to court documents released in the ruling, referenced in a story published by the Democrat and Chronicle, during salary negotiations Avon Town Judge Michael Torregiano argued that he should get a pay raise because of a favorable ruling on a speeding ticket case involving the daughter of Avon Town Council Member Tom Mairs.
The Commission ruling quotes Torregiano as saying, during a Town Council executive session meeting on Dec 30, 2010, during salary negotiations, “I took care of a ticket for (your) daughter and this is the thanks that I get.”
The bitter feud between The Avon Town Board and Judge Torregiano began when he was granted a raise that he apparently felt compared poorly to that granted to a colleague. Councilman Mairs voted against Judge Torregiano getting the raise.
In the ruling, the Commission states that Councilman Mairs was not found to have abused his power as an elected official, and had not requested any favors for his daughter due to his position as an elected official.
“By linking a lenient disposition he had granted to the daughter of a Town Board member to the member’s vote on respondent’s salary, respondent conveyed the appearance that the disposition was based on favoritism and that he wanted a quid pro quo,” stated the court documents filed by the State of New York Commission on Judicial Conduct. “The respondent certainly should have considered the serious implications of his words.”
The Commission on Judicial Conduct ruled 7-2 in favor of censure. Justices Cohen and Emery dissented, ruling that a stricter penalty than censure would be appropriate.
“It might be, perhaps, that that remark was a thoughtless comment resulting from his deeply-felt anger, for which respondent has now properly apologized,” stated the dissenting justices in their ruling. “On the other hand, the fact that that particular ticket’s disposition loomed so large in his memory several years later may suggest that when he handled that case, he was mindful of the defendant’s father’s role in setting his salary.”
“I took care of a ticket for (your) daughter) and this is the thanks that I get.” stated Torregiano towards Councilman Mairs during the Executive session meeting on Dec 30, 2010.
The bitter feud between The Avon Town Board and Judge Torregiano began when he was not granted a raise compared to that of his colleague. Councilman Mairs voted against Judge Torregiano getting the raise.
In the ruling the court states that Councilman Mairs was not found to have abused his power as an elected official, and did not request any favors as a result of his position as an elected official for his daughter.
“By linking a lenient disposition he had granted to the daughter of a Town Board member to the member’s vote on respondent’s salary, respondent conveyed the appearance that the disposition was based on favoritism and that he wanted a quid pro quo,” stated according to the court documents filed by the State of New York Commission on Judicial Conduct. “The respondent certainly should have considered the serious implications of his words.”
The court ruled 7-2 in favor of censure. Justices Cohen and Emery dissented ruling that a stricter penalty is appropriate.
You can read the entire decision by clicking HERE