Beneath all the hyperbole of the squabble for the last two weeks between state Sen. Darrel Aubertine and his political opponent David A. Renzi lie serious questions of ethical behavior.

The noise is about dirty tricks by political operatives and personal attacks in campaign advertising.

Those are not the issues.

To define the issue, one needs to follow the flow of the money. In Mr. Aubertine's case, soon after he was elected senator he appointed his sister to a position on his staff. Debra A. Wiley was paid $1,971 for the work she did before it was reported that her appointment was a violation of the state Public Officers Law.

While an assemblyman, Mr. Aubertine voted for the portion of the law which prohibits political officials from appointing relatives to the state payroll. The law requires the appointing politician to repay the state and imposes a possible penalty of $40,000.

Shortly after the appointment was reported in April, Mrs. Wiley resigned her post. Now, more than six months later, the money has not been repaid.

Apparently Mr. Aubertine, D-Cape Vincent, did not understand the law he voted for.

Mr. Renzi, a Republican, has practiced municipal law in Jefferson County where he engaged in a widespread practice in which towns declare their attorneys employees rather than contractors in order to allow the attorney to earn state pension credits. Mr. Renzi did exactly that in Pamelia where he paid the costs of the benefit.

Then, earlier this year, the rules changed when state Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo launched an investigation of the practice. That investigation widened to include state Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli's office. The ultimate ruling made it clear that attorneys could not be classified as municipal employees for pension purposes.

The ruling made sense and ensnared David Renzi's brother, Eugene P., and his law partner Paul Dierdorf. And it is right here that David Renzi made a mistake. He modified his position with the town to coincide with the regulations, but he failed to disclose what he had done. A simple statement by David Renzi of what had happened would have spared us all from this excess of shouting.

David Renzi did understand the new rule and he voluntarily complied. He did not cost the taxpayers anything. Darrel Aubertine has yet to comply.

That is the contrast between David Renzi and Darrel Aubertine. And that is what this shouting is about.