In June 2024, Village of Montgomery Trustee Randi Picarello submitted a complaint form regarding Mayor Michael Hembury to the village ethics board. Her submission referenced the mayor’s statements, interactions with trustees and residents, and involvement in government operations from 2024 and prior. The ethics board members, after a yearlong review, determined that the mayor violated the village code of ethics on several occasions, and they sent Picarello their findings in July 2025.

As of March 3, the village board made the ethics board’s findings accessible to the public. Additionally, both Hembury and Picarello have recently provided in-depth responses on the latter’s complaints. Here is a breakdown of the complaint form’s most outstanding issues and the ethics board’s determinations:

Discriminatory language toward the village community
Picarello stated that Hembury used discriminatory language on several occasions during public meetings. She listed a handful of examples, including:

During a board meeting on May 21, 2024, Hembury stated that only lifelong and native residents would “have a say in” the village’s newly acquired caboose and the work needed to repair it. The ethics board determined that this statement was not a violation, as the mayor likely wanted to honor and prioritize the residents who “were born and raised in the village” and “remember where the railroad was.”

When Hembury was a village trustee, he expressed opposition to residential and affordable housing in the village. When asked about these types of housing during a candidates’ night in March 2021, he said “you’re gonna get the camel’s nose under the tent, and once ya do, ya might not like what ya get.” He also stated multiple times that apartments and affordable housing would bring “undesirables” and “monsters” into the village. The ethics board determined that these statements were violations; the members felt that the comments conveyed “bias and fear” and could be perceived as “unlawful discriminatory behavior.”

During a candidates’ night in March 2024, Hembury stated that he could not say “the R word” because he was a board member, and he did not want to “let the monsters in.” The ethics board determined that these statements were also violations, for the same reasons as his 2021 comments.

Picarello felt that this language was discriminatory against newer and future residents. She questioned what a “native” resident means and pointed out that Hembury himself is not a lifelong resident, as he was born and raised in the Bronx.

“My understanding is that he doesn’t want poor people, he doesn’t want religious groups, and he doesn’t want a lot of different people to come into this village. He wants everybody to just stay the same. He also uses the word native, which is offensive on many fronts,” Picarello said March 21. “What is a native? Someone whose family came here on the Mayflower and settled in Montgomery? Is it someone who’s been here for two or three generations? Or is it someone who was born here? Because in his own context, he’s not a ‘native’ resident, he came here as an adult to have a better life for his family. So how do you define who should have a say?”

Hembury, meanwhile, stated that the aforementioned “monsters” and “undesirables” referred to the Aden Brook property, and the “R word” referred to residential housing. He felt that Aden Brook’s proposed annexation would have created problems for the village, speculating that it would have eventually transitioned from industrial zoning to residential zoning. He asserted that he did not want a property owner “controlling” the village and did not want apartments overrunning home ownership.

“The camel’s nose under the tent is like the Trojan Horse; they’ll come in and they’ll promise you everything, and then once you approve it, it comes out. Aden Brook wanted to annex five acres of their property into the Village of Montgomery. And I said no because they’ll come in, they’ll promise you anything, and then we won’t be able to fight them,” Hembury said March 20. “The monster is the Aden Brook property. You approve annexation, the monster will come in, and you won’t be able to control it. They will have more money, they have deeper pockets than the village does. They will have attorneys fighting us, and they’ll control us.”

Mistreatment of Picarello and other trustees
Picarello stated that the mayor has mistreated her numerous times during public meetings, from commenting on her mental health to excluding her from village business. Some examples she cited included:

During a board meeting on June 4, 2024, Picarello raised several issues regarding board transparency, exclusion from decision-making, poor treatment and lack of communication. In response, Hembury told Picarello that “dealing with you is like the movie ‘50 First Dates,’” “you never know who you are dealing with,” she is “hysterical and unhinged,” and “I never know which Randi I will get.” The ethics board concluded that these statements were violations, as the comments sounded “personal, disrespectful, and inappropriate” and could lead to a sexual harassment or gender bias lawsuit. The members also speculated that Picarello may have provoked the mayor after reading her list of complaints at the meeting.

During that same meeting, Hembury and Picarello engaged in an argument. Hembury loudly stated that Picarello “came to my house screaming and crying”; repeated “came to my house” four times; and exclaimed “never again!” While he did not provide context at the time, the mayor was referencing a conversation that he and Picarello had in 2020; Picarello noted that she did not cry or scream. The ethics board determined that these interactions were violations, describing the mayor’s behavior as verbally abusive with the intent to “embarrass, disparage, and humiliate” Picarello during a public meeting.

During a board meeting on March 4, 2024, Hembury proposed a resolution to make the village a non-sanctuary municipality without prior advancement. Picarello stated that the resolution, along with new items and changes on that meeting’s agenda, were discussed without her. She also requested to amend the wording of the resolution, but she was denied and the resolution passed that same meeting. The ethics board determined that the situation was not a violation, though the members described the resolution as “poorly planned and sparsely written.”

Picarello previously requested clarification on how trustees add items to the agenda, but her questions and emails went ignored and unanswered. The ethics board determined that the situation was not a violation, as the mayor eventually explained that trustees need to speak with the village clerk about agenda items.

Picarello asserted that Hembury had exhibited this type of behavior before he became mayor and before she became a trustee. She added that, while Hembury targets her most of the time, he has also mistreated the trustees who were elected in 2025. Regarding the agenda, Picarello noted that she and the other trustees still have a difficult time adding items to it.

“Prior to the changeover of the board last year, he very much targeted me. It was very clear that there were communications, meetings, and discussions being held without me, and I would not have access to any of it. Not only was I not answered when I pushed back and tried to get answers, I was insulted. I would show up to meetings where there was clearly already a consensus and I had no idea that things were going to be discussed,” Picarello said March 21. “I have since seen the same pattern of behavior directed at other trustees, but that didn’t happen until the changeover.”

Hembury confirmed that he made those comments to Picarello during the board meeting on June 4, 2024, claiming that she “made a scene” after he asked her not to.

“Before we came in (to the meeting), I said ‘please, let’s not have a scene out here, let’s not have a show,’ and she said ‘okay, I won’t.’ We were out there for one minute, and she went crazy,” Hembury said March 20. “And I said ‘you just told me you weren’t going to do this.’ That’s what led up to my remarks.”

Misappropriation of funds toward a trustee investigation
Picarello stated that the mayor used taxpayer dollars to fund an investigation of her in 2024. In the days leading up to the village’s last mayoral election, resident Rob Saladin circulated posts on social media accusing the trustee of racist language, which she denied ever occurred. Picarello asserted that William Frank, the former village attorney, was conflicted about conducting an investigation, and Joe McKay, the current planning board attorney, was against the investigation, but Hembury pushed the village to go through with it. She added that the village board never brought the issue to the ethics board to review, and that she was not allowed to read the full investigation document.

“When the complaint was initially made, Will Frank said he was conflicted. Joe McKay, who was our planning board attorney and also conflict attorney at the time, advised us not to pursue the investigation,” Picarello said March 21. “Mike didn’t like that answer, so he asked Will to advise again. At that point, Will was magically no longer conflicted, he presented the board, and he said that he would take a vote. The board at the time voted to pursue spending taxpayer dollars to hire a firm, without ever even bringing it to the board of ethics, for an investigation.”

Hembury, meanwhile, stated the opposite: he did not want to conduct an investigation, but former village attorney William Frank pushed him to do it. He emphasized that he had nothing to do with the village spending $30,000 on the investigation.

“I had nothing to do with that, the attorneys ordered the village to do the investigation. I had nothing to do with finding emails, text messages, or anything else,” Hembury said March 20. “I could not care less, and I had every intention of just making it go away, until I was ordered to. The board voted to do this, not me, so when people say ‘oh, you were beating her up,’ I wasn’t.”

The ethics board determined that the situation was not a violation, as the members found that Frank was the “deciding opinion” for the investigation.

Nepotism in the village government
Picarello stated that the mayor engages in nepotism, or favoritism toward relatives in a workplace. She explained that the village has employed three of the mayor’s family members, including his two daughters, Jennifer Jackson and Michelle Donovan, in the village’s summer camp program. Picarello asserted that, while Hembury did not appoint his daughters, he and the board still oversee both their annual appointments and the summer camp’s budget. She added that the village has never advertised the camp counselor positions that Jackson and Donovan have held “since their creation and appointment in 2012.”

“My personal issue is not so much that it’s nepotism, it’s a lack of a nepotism policy. Not only have we employed three of his children, his son-in-law did a stint at the camp as well. I’m not saying these people are not qualified, but we need to have the knowledge that this is happening, and we need a policy for it,” Picarello said March 21. “You can’t directly oversee your family members, and we’re overseeing and voting on a budget that his family is taking home. They’re receiving $200,000 a year from that budget in annual income, benefits and retirement. I don’t think the village should be unaware that, in some instances, it’s been the sole provider for an entire household when we’re employing couples.”

The ethics board determined that the daughters’ positions as camp counselors do not constitute nepotism, as “the mayor had nothing to do with their hiring.” Both counselors went through the program as campers, then volunteers, before they were hired by Tom Taylor, the village’s summer recreation director. Hembury added that his daughters have been camp counselors since long before he joined the village government.

“They’ve been going to camp since they were 5 years old and worked their way up through the ranks. I had nothing to do with it,” Hembury said March 20. “My son-in-law also started working for the village and running the water department long before I had anything to do with this. He wasn’t my son-in-law at the time, and my daughter happened to marry a guy from the department of public works. I had nothing to do with that either.”

Hostile, exclusionary
and contentious interactions with residents
Picarello explained that Hembury has created a “hostile, exclusionary, and contentious” environment during public meetings. She cited various interactions between him and residents at meetings, including:

During a board meeting on July 2, 2024, Hembury discussed the need for background checks and fingerprinting for new employees. He stated that the Montgomery Senior Center Advisory Board hired a new senior coordinator, Mary McCabe, without informing him or conducting a background check. He then loudly stated “what if they hire Lizzie Borden — famous axe murderer — and she kills, God forbid, the people down there.” McCabe, who was present at the meeting, did not appreciate Hembury’s comment and told him that he was “casting aspersions on her character.”

During a board meeting on Dec. 6, 2023, resident Don Berger commented on the Aden Brook annexation, noting that he had changed his mind on the proposal. In response, Hembury said “oh, you talked before you knew?” in a sarcastic tone.

During a board meeting on June 4, 2024, Berger spoke about a large truck speeding through the village and how a nearby police officer did not stop the vehicle. Hembury responded by shouting several sarcastic remarks, insinuating that Berger was calling the police lazy.

Regarding McCabe, Hembury reiterated that he wants background checks and fingerprinting done on all village employees, including the senior center coordinator. He emphasized that McCabe was hired by the advisory board, not the village, and clarified that he referenced Lizzie Borden as a metaphor, not an insult toward McCabe. Regarding Berger’s comment on Aden Brook’s annexation, Hembury noted that Berger changed his mind on the proposal only after he “knew the facts.”

“The senior center comes under my purview, and I want everybody in this village to get a background check. My job is to protect the employees here, and I want to make sure that there’s a background check,” Hembury said March 20. “That lady (McCabe) was not employed by the senior center when this happened … she didn’t work for the village, she worked for the advisory board.”

The ethics board determined that all three of these interactions violated the ethics code, describing the mayor’s behavior as hostile and highly inappropriate.

Authoritarian leadership
Building on her previous points, Picarello asserted that Hembury’s leadership is akin to a dictatorship with very little inclusiveness. She recounted a board meeting on May 7, 2024, during which the mayor declared that all employees would be off on Juneteenth without following the necessary protocol to make the decision. Picarello stressed that the mayor’s leadership has created severe conflicts and tensions within the village government and community, leading to the entire board being blamed for his actions.

“Mike ran for a leadership position, and he has not fulfilled that. He’s more worried about reputation, power, and saying that he’s the mayor than the leadership of what’s going on,” Picarello said March 21. “If he was leading, I and the other three trustees would be empowered to do things. And as a whole, we could come together and be a cohesive unit, no matter who likes who. But I think he’s unapproachable and dismissive, and it’s created a toxicity in this staff and within this community. I hope that we can see the other side of it, because this is not what I or anybody signed up for.”

Hembury asserted that, as mayor, he will do things as he sees fit and correct. He emphasized that his No. 1 priority is the village’s safety, and he wants to do whatever is necessary to protect residents.

“I will do as I see fit and as I see correct. The buck stops with me,” Hembury said March 22. “When you elect a retired cop as the mayor, he comes with the experience from a paramilitary organization, and he likes things done organized. I wear my heart on my sleeve, and I’m extremely protective of the four corners of this village … the number one thing on my mind is safety for the residents in this village.”

Recommendations and closing remarks
Following its review, the ethics board gave Hembury, Picarello and the whole village board several recommendations to address the aforementioned issues. For the mayor, the ethics board suggested that he attend a one-on-one comprehensive harassment prevention training program, seek additional training to inhibit impulsive speech, modify his behavior, set up several confidential mediation sessions with Picarello through a trained professional, and write a joint apology with Picarello to the community. 

It asked that Picarello learns patience and remove her signaturte line “Your Village Trustee’ and that she refrain from needling the mayor, which appears to provoke conflict. It also recommended confidential mediation sessions for the two officials.

“I an attempt to restore confidence in the Board of Trustees, the community deserves an apology from both Mayor Hembury and Trustee Picarello,” the committee noted in its summary.

“I feel like they took a lot of time, and they were very thoughtful about the consideration. It was very clear by the answers that they gave that they considered and deliberated every single side of it. I really appreciate the positions that they were in, the report that they have, and the time that they put into it,” Picarello said March 21. “I think that there was an effort made to make it seem like it was just about Mike, even though the complaint was about Mike … I didn’t fully agree with all of it, but I understood the intent that we took group ownership and it wasn’t just all on Mike.”

Hembury, on the other hand, was not satisfied with the village ethics board. He described the group as poorly managed, comprising “untrained” members who did not know how to run their board or get along with each other. Hembury asserted that none of the complaints in Picarello’s submission were ethical violations, but rather just the results of “two people who don’t get along with each other.”

“The four people on the ethics board have no training. They allowed me no witnesses, and they didn’t even invite me to speak,” Hembury said March 20. “I found out through the grapevine that they were reviewing complaints against me, and I said ‘wait a second, I should be able to have my day in court.’”

The Board is Ethics is chaired by Jeanne Mueller. Other memberts are: Judith Lozier, Doug Coe, Jose A. Hernandez and Bruce Yancewicz Sr,