Courts Want Say in Selection of Row Officers

She's one of the genuinely nicest people who's ever worked for Northampton County. Dot Cole retired recently from her position as Register of Wills and Clerk of Orphans Court. The question of her successor, however, has raised questions about the powers of the Executive and Judicial branches of government. Executive John Stoffa has appointed a replacement. But as I understand it, the courts are reluctant to swear her in. Let me fill you in.

Unlike most counties, Northampton County appoints its row officers, from Sheriff to Recorder of Deeds. Jerry Seyfried, who has served as Executive, member of Council and Director of Court Services, explains why.

"Today, Northampton County promotes and compels competitive testing for all these positions. Career Service Regulations, updated periodically,assure that we get the best individuals to head these departments. All the positions under the Department head are also filled by testing. Highest test results usually result in getting the promotion. Most of our Department Heads have years of on hand experience. Under the Row Office Election system, it was a popularity contest and the newly elected official gave out the jobs in those respective offices to political hacks. That doesn't happen anymore in Northampton County. There is also a grievance procedure in place for any individual who feels they were passed over for a promotion. There is an independent Board of arbitrators who will hear the case and they have the authority to override the decision of the appointing authority. There are also safeguards as to posting of all test scores to eliminate someone with a low test score being interviewed before someone with a very high test score. Northampton County is the leader in this field. I don't want to bore you with lots of details, but I do want your readers to know that Northampton County has a great staff of employees. Most of this is because we no longer elect row offices."

Most of the time, when a new row officer is appointed, there's little or no fanfare. But the question of Dot's successor has the courts concerned. Although the Administrative Code places this office under the control of the County Executive, judges feel they should have some control over those row offices.

A little over a year ago, judges convened an emergency hearing about delays, primarily in the criminal division. Convicted defendants who belonged in state prison were sitting in the County jail. Appellate courts were firing memos at judges about delays in getting records. A logjam of paperwork prevented judges from even arraigning criminal defendants, and getting that all-important plea.

This delay was the result of a criminal division staff embroiled in office squabbles since the arrest of a Deputy for embezzlement. Because they're all members of public sector unions, there's little that Stoffa or his Director of Court Services could do, except impose overtime. Had these workers been judicial employees, they could have been fired, union or not.

Some Council members, like Ron Angle, pushed to have the entire Department of Court Services placed under the control of the courts, where it really does belong. There was some question whether a Home Rule Charter amendment should be considered, but the push for better accountability ended with Angle's term.

Courts work closely with the Criminal Division, Civil Division and Register of Wills. But if they select the Register of Wills, there's another problem because they are often called upon to review Register decisions.

On the other hand, count administrators have no clue what goes on in that row office. The test prepared for that office came from people who might have a combined five years of County service.

Ideally, this is a matter that should have long ago been considered by Council's Legal and Judicial Committee. But Lamont McClure, its Chairman, has convened no meetings this year. Or last year. Or the year before.

Now, with Dot Cole's appointed successor waiting in the wings, the question has risen again and is very much on the front burner. Courts feel that they, and not the Executive, should make these appointments. They, not the Executive, receive the nastygrams from appellate courts when records are delayed. They, unlike the Executive, also have the hammer to deal with petty office in-fighting.

As you might have guessed, this new appointment is rather controversial for another reason. Someone outside of the office has been selected. This has raised a lot of eyebrows. But my focus here is not to review the merits of an appointment already made, but to discuss whether the courts should at least have a say in the appointment of someone who works closely with them. They get that with the Sheriff's appointment. I'd argue they should have total control over the criminal division, civil division and register of wills.