About two weeks ago, NorCo DA Steve Baratta wanted County Council's blessing to hire a retiring Bethlehem police officer as a new county detective. At the same time, he wanted to give all county detectives, who are part of a collective bargaining unit, a 15% payraise. He was missing one thing - the proposed resolution. It was pulled by the county administration. As Executive Lamont McClure explained it, the county administration, and not the DA, is the exclusive negotiator of union contracts, even for the DA and judges. County Council Solicitor Chris Spadoni told Baratta to just prepare his own resolution, and County Council would vote on it this evening. That, too, would violate the Home Rule Charter requirement that only the administration negotiates collective bargaining agreements. Fortunately, the matter has been resolved.
Under Northampton County's Home Rule Charter (HRC) and what was once referred to as Section 1620 rights, the District Attorney has very broad power to "appoint, promote, transfer, demote, suspend [or] dismiss" both career service and exempt employees. But he is bound by any of the collective bargaining agreements are in place, which in this case apply to both his secretarial staff and county detectives. He also lacks the authority to deal with the union on his own whim. That is the prerogative of the Executive.
The HRC specifically vests the Executive with the authority to "supervise and direct the negotiation and administration of any collective bargaining agreements with employees ... ." This makes sense because it is the Executive, and not the DA, who has to pay for whatever wages and benefits are negotiated.
What about County Council? Neither they nor the Executive play any role in a district attorney's assessment of what positions he needs. And County Council plays no role in contract negotiations. But it has the most important role. It is up to them to "approve any collective bargaining agreements with officers and employees." They have the power of the purse.
How was this matter resolved? Tonight, Baratta will ask County Council to approve a brand-new exempt county detective position at a salary of $77,403. The DA has the right to hire and fire when it comes to exempt positions. He is no longer seeking a salary upgrade for the remaining detectives, but has made his wishes known to the Executive, and the Executive will hoor those wishes.
County Council is being asked to approve the salary. They play no role in hiring decisions o0f an independently elected official or in contract negotiations, but they set the salary.
27 comments:
"the most important role"
Seriously? County Council will rubber stamp this like everything else they are handed and told it is the law, so do it. What are you smoking.
Will Baratta also be bringing Council a recommendation on where to makes cuts in his department to pay for the new position?
If not, it’s a loser for the taxpayer and needs to be voted down.
Lori’s stupid game playing almost derailed this delicate dance - which is well settled. Lori needs to spending less time on CCAP and NACO, and more on learning how Norco actually works.
If the County hired someone with Knowledge of the HOME RULE CHARTER, or if the County hired a Council Clerk that would take time and read the Charter and read the State Legislation that pertains to Home Rule Counties, they would avoid these controversies. You should apply for the job. An educated County Clerk like Frank Flissar would never let this happen. He was worth his weight in gold.
8:21, He was worth his weight on gold. I would not apply for the job for several reasons. First, I am too old and no longer want to put in 40-hour weeks. Second, I am not psychologically suited to such a job. The clerk has 9 bosses on council and must be able to play nice with everyone on council, to say nothing of the various departments. I'd never be able to do that. It takes a special kind of person, and that person is not me. Third, a Clerk has to be neutral and should never weigh in on policy. I would be unable to do that. Fourth, I like observing and writing about the county. I would be unable to do that if I worked for the county or council.
"Will Baratta also be bringing Council a recommendation on where to makes cuts in his department to pay for the new position?"
Baratta has advised his request will have no impact on his budget this or next year. It is very unwise to interfere with an independently elected official's estimate of what he needs, especially a DA who is charged with the responsibility of prosecuting criminals.
First, allow me to whine — this a nice gig for a retiring police officer. Great benefits, good working conditions, and a cushy paycheck. Second, some questions.
Were there applicants for this position or was it “given” to this retiring police officer?
Did the detectives illegally terminated (i.e. fired prior to BaRATta taking office) apply?
Where may I find the budget for the DA’s office, as well as expenditures?
This salary would pay for at least one new ADA, so am I correctly assuming that area is fully staffed?
Bernie, you assert that people shouldn’t “interfere” with the needs of those “independently elected.” Really? I thought this entire blog was keeping the independently elected honest. Giving anyone, except the owner of a company, carte blanche is a very slippery slope.
11:56, The DA, like the judges and the controller, is an independently elected office. His is also a constitutional office The HRC specifically gives him the right to fire and hire exempt employees at his discretion, just like the judges. He also has that right by statute. It was known as Section 1620 rights, but there is a new section I forget at this time.
He has no obligation to seek applicants for a position. He can give the job to anyone he wants so long as that person is a police officer.
The detectives who were terminated illegally by Baratta (it violated the CBA) were allowed to stay at home until their retirement dates and collect a check. That is how the county, the exclusive bargaining agent, negotiated the grievance.
The DA is not fully staffed and does not expect to be fully staffed for some time.
The budget for the DA is submitted as part of the executive's budget. If he and the Exec disagree, he can ask council to amend the budget.
The DA is not above scrutiny, which I do provide. But he is entitled to great deference in hiring decisions and budgetary matters bc he has the responsibility of keeping this community safe. If he gets crazy and wants to pay everyone $1 million, that is where the other branches step in. If they get crazy and refuse to give him the funding necessary to fight crime, he can sue and he will win.
What explanation was given as to why the DA had to hire an additional detective as an at will employee rather than a contracted employee like the others. Does the new hire have specialized training or expertise and what is the disparity in salary and benefits between the new hire and existing detectives (if any). Seems odd.
He does not need to explain it. He has the right to do so.
Bernie, should the tax payers have the right to at least know who the new Det. will be?
Wow! The former judge certainly wields a lot of power. Just the fact that he is an elected figure with access to seemingly unlimited funds shouldn't excuse him from being accountable to those for whom he works -- you know, those people called taxpayers. Abuse of power usually happens because people claim an elected official "does not need to explain." Mr. Baratta made big promises when he was running for office, but he has had a difficult time fulfilling them. He was quick to sling mud, but now is awfully quiet.
4:25 He identified the new detective, a retiring Bethlehem police officer. He also named him, but I have not done so bc I forgot it.
6:32, At no time did anyone say that the DA has access to unlimited funds. That is inaccurate. And it is I who said he has no need to explain. I am not defending Baratta, but the office. You seem to be mixing up the two. Baratta has been transparent about what he is doing, even though he has no need to be. If he fails, he will be replaced.
Anon 11:56 said: “…this a nice gig for a retiring police officer. Great benefits, good working conditions, and a cushy paycheck.”
Don’t forget the double pension that will surely come.
Bernie O'Hare 9:47 said:
“Baratta has advised his request will have no impact on his budget this or next year.”
Council should request an explanation of how this will have no impact in years 1 and 2, as well as what the impact is in year 3 and beyond.
Knowing the answers to those questions is critical to both the budgetary role of council and public accountability for the DA’s office.
I’d hate to think that the DA’s budget already contains quite a bit of padding, to the point where it can absorb the cost of a new employee.
Also, you state the salary of the new position is $77,403. What’s the real cost, when you include things like taxes and benefits? That’s a far more accurate number as far as the true cost and should be known as well.
11:51 pm, you bring up a valid point, but I think the DA’s office is currently so understaffed, that this position is easily absorbed. If the department becomes fully-staffed (doubtful) in the next year or two, then there may be budget concerns. When Houck was DA, there was staff transparency. The County website listed all personnel in the office and provided background on each. That may have been too much information, but I think too little is the case now. I’d be interested to know how many remain from the Houck years.
Anonymous said...
11:51 pm, you bring up a valid point, but I think the DA’s office is currently so understaffed, that this position is easily absorbed. If the department becomes fully-staffed (doubtful) in the next year or two, then there may be budget concerns. When Houck was DA, there was staff transparency. The County website listed all personnel in the office and provided background on each. That may have been too much information, but I think too little is the case now. I’d be interested to know how many remain from the Houck years.
I believe Baratta either fired or constructively forced out all the Houck hires and there are only 2 holdovers from the previous administration and they were both Morganelli hires
8:20am, is it really 2? Because one is gone in the afternoon, and the other is too busy fraternizing with the clerical staff.
And still no story by Bernie on the very bad DUI another one of the other ADAs has gotten. If you read the police report, it's so bad to the point that I am surprised this guy still has a job.
Yes, only two. Disappointing to hear that veteran prosecutors are behaving in such a way. I single and ready to mingle comes to mind.
I know nothing about an ADA charged with DUI. Please provide the details.
11:51 pm here again:
The scenarios put forth by 6:51 AM and 8:20 AM are both possible and reasonable.
But those questions still need to be asked - and answered - on the record in a public meeting.
https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/Report/CpDocketSheet?docketNumber=CP-39-CR-0002636-2024&dnh=X71L5mK1JKQ8hKQJ1sEfxg%3D%3D
It’s a fair question. Are there any ADAs on staff that have been charged with DUIs ? If so, how many ? What was the disposition ?
"https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/Report/CpDocketSheet?docketNumber=CP-39-CR-0002636-2024&dnh=X71L5mK1JKQ8hKQJ1sEfxg%3D%3D"
Ty. Will check it out.
I imagine this prosecutor will receive the customary fine and classes, which should be afforded to him, as it would any other citizen. Shame that he has created a hardship for himself, though.
Bernie, from the reading of this thread, it sounds like the DA’s office isn’t in any better shape than when Houck was at the helm. Baratta should be asked some tough questions (and ones that a seasoned judge can’t tiptoe around) because he has not delivered on his promises. There is still a backlog of cases, largely due to the gutting of the office. He can complain all he wants about staffing, but it seems as though he put himself (and the county) in this position.
3:28 pm: Scary question and I hope the number is zero. In my line of work, if I get even one DUI, I’m done.
1:36 pm: This guy is old enough to know better. Close to 60 and still driving drunk.
Post a Comment