Updated, Tuesday, Jan. 14, 4:40 p.m.: City Council President Loretta Scott said in a press conference this afternoon that Council by mutual consent decided to pursue the ethics review because it is being inundated with calls from the media and from the public. The uproar is sucking the air out of the room, Scott said, and the ethics board review will hopefully allow the city to move on. The review should begin by the end of the month, she said. 

ORIGINAL POST: 
The City of Rochester’s ethics board will look into the flack surrounding Mayor Lovely Warren’s security team. Citing threats and comments on social media, Warren has hired a two-man security detail, which will be on call 24/7. One of the members of the detail is Warren’s uncle, Reggie Hill, a retiring state trooper. Combined, the two men

Lovely Warren Credit: FILE PHOTO

will  earn  more than $140,000 a year. 

Warren has said that the appointments are temporary until the jobs are posted and filled through Civil Service. 

City Council announced in a statement released late last night that the ethics board would review whether the hirings meet Civil Service Commission requirements, and whether Hill’s hiring violates the city’s anti-nepotism policy. 

The statement appears to have been drafted by City Hall staff with the approval of Council members. It’s not clear, though, who actually called for the review. A call to Council President Loretta Scott hasn’t been returned yet. 

I was unable to find anything called an “anti nepotism policy” on the city’s website. The closest I came is a sentence in the city Code of Ethics: 

“No city officer or employee, acting in the performance of his official duties, shall treat, whether by action or omission to act, any person more favorably than it is the custom and practice to treat the general public.” 

The seven-member Board of Ethics is appointed by City Council. It consists of one City Council member, the city’s director of the Office of Public Integrity, and five other members who cannot be officers or employees of the city. An interesting note: according to the code, no more than three of the final five members can be from the same political party. (The current board has two Republicans.) 

The Warren case won’t be reviewed until two vacancies on the ethics board are filled. One of those slots is expected to be filled by the reappointment of Calvin Lee, whose term expired at the end of last year. Council should vote on Lee’s reappointment this month. 

The second slot is the mayor’s to fill. 

In a statement released shortly after Council’s announcement, Warren said she welcomes the review by the ethics board. 

“I will be available to answer any and all questions, and supply any information requested by the board,” she said. 

This article appears in Jan 8-14, 2014.

I'm City's news editor, which means I oversee all aspects of our news-gathering operation. I also sneak in to an occasional City Council meeting and cover Rochester's intriguing and eclectic neighbors....

8 replies on “[UPDATED] Warren says she welcomes ethics board review”

  1. Isn’t it ludicrous to hire a security guard to be on call? The enormous salaries are being justified because they are on call 24/7. These guys are really just glorified drivers and any threats would have to be handled by calling 911 just like everybody else. The only reason I can see for them being on call would be spur-of-the-moment trips.

    A waste of taxpayer money? Indeed.

  2. I would really like to hear more about Uncle Reggie’s qualifications. I understand he was a state trooper for many years – that’s a good start – but the security he provided for governors is of particular interest to me. Did he participate in the planning and coordination of said security, or was he simply one of many state troopers that served on the detail? Was he responsible for driving the governor around or did he sit in his cruiser blocking access to a side road while the governor’s vehicle drove past? Was he permanently assigned to the governor’s detail or did he only participate when the gov was in the Rochester area?

    The fact that he was a state trooper may be enough to be considered “qualified” – I don’t know. What I do know is that the mayor’s office has repeatedly cited his past as a member of the governor’s security detail – first as justification for hiring him, then as justification for traveling at reckless speeds on the thruway.

  3. Response to Kenneth Warner’s Blog about Mayor Warren Jan.16th, 2014 D&C Newspaper

    Yes Kenneth.. it is time to stop challenging Mayor Warren’s integrity, morals and her judgment. It is time to support her next four years as Mayor of our ” Two Cities of Rochester. ” And, I can help her and our “Two Cities” by suggesting the following actions be implemented:

    1. Call the NYS Police Department and have a speeding ticket issued to her driver ( Uncle Reggie ).

    2. Keep the current security detail in place and temporary for now… then make the positions open to all qualified candidates through Civil Service that want to apply to the City of Rochester Human Resources Dept. for the positions as of February 1st, 2014. The hiring decision is made by the Deputy Mayor if indeed the detail reports to the Deputy Mayor… as reported by our local media and the Democrat and Chronicle.

    3. Mayor Warren should consider demoting Spencer Ash to his original position in City Govt’, where ever that may have been, since he allegedly lied to her in the initial interview for New Development Director. My own opinion is that he should be replaced. Employers can and do terminate or demote newly hired employees , if after hiring a person, determine that the person lied in the initial interview.

    4. Lovely can do what ever she feels is necessary as our newly elected mayor but I hope she is fair and balanced in her decisions on these issues being discussed. I am going to support her efforts in the future.

    Craig Moffitt

  4. Remember that this security detail was created by and for the mayor. It was wanted because the mayor wanted it. The mayor is handling her security in the way she wants. She is only revealing what she wants about it.

    Any criticism of it is a criticism of her. She felt she had to do this at the time and perhaps she was right.

    I would advise the ethics board to do something to relieve her of the burden of responsiblity for her own security so someone else can be accountable. The mayor has much to do without having this to manage and defend.

  5. And I would just like to add one more thing about the mayor and her security. If she were paying for it herself, none of this would be an issue. Since she is not, then ALL (with some exceptions) must be out in the open. And this has NOT been done. If you don’t like it, I don’t know what to tell you, that’s the way it is in a Democracy.

  7. I hope no one fell for Ken Warner’s support of Lovely Warren in the D&C. He supports Lovely by dragging everyone else down by suggesting that everyone speeds. This is simple not true. I cannot afford a speeding ticket and I have respect for the law, therefore I don’t speed.

  8. “He supports Lovely by dragging everyone else down by suggesting that everyone speeds. ” Totally true! Unless you define “speeding” as even 1 mph over the speed limit. I’ve received a single speeding ticket in my life, and that was many decades ago. (For 38 mph in a 30 mph zone.) I have never come close, anywhere, to 92 or 97 mph, and I suspect extremely few other people have. So the argument that it’s no big deal because everybody does it just doesn’t cut it. Speeds that high endanger everyone — our mayor, others on the highway, and state troopers trying to enforce the law.

Comments are closed.