What Is NorCo DA Steve Baratta Doing to Combat Crime?

NorCo DA Steve Baratta made the case for several upgrades in his office during NorCo's Personnel Committee yesterday attended by three Council members Tom Giovanni, Lori Vargo Heffner and Jeff Warren. I'll get into that, but he also briefed Council on just what his office is doing to combat crime.

He's starting an auto theft task force and has grant money that will help pay for it. The money actually comes from our auto insurance premiums. There are about five or six active task forces at this time in Philly, Allegheny, Bucks, Lehigh, Montgomery and possibly Chester. "This is getting to be a more active area of law enforcement," he explained. He's already spent $90,000 in drug task force funds for license plate readers throughout the county, which he said exist on nearly every street in Allentown. He posits this will lead to the recovery of more stolen cars.  He plans to meet with Warren and Monroe Counties to collaborate in joint operations. A full time DA and a county detective will be assigned to this task force.   

He mentioned a recent raid at smoke shops selling contraband to children. "We're going to be caught up in that and further investigating that for a while." He indicated his office was receiving complaints from schools about kids getting sick because they were vaping controlled substances above the legal limit for THC. He added there are "other funny chemicals" in products being sold at these smoke shops. "It got to be a real problem," especially because "a lot of these shops are located near schools."

He has started a central court for DUI, and the result is that these cases are moving through the criminal justice system more quickly. He said most of those cases are resolved then and there.

He wants to be more involved in community engagement and is working toward that goal. He wants to send "role models" to area schools to encourage students to avoid criminal activity. He indicated that juveniles who offend also tend to continue when they are adults. "We need to get to those kids and we need to try to help them become productive." 

What are the upgrades he seeks? 

First, he wants to upgrade five (5) FT Assistant District Attorney 1 positions. - Baratta explained these employees have done a "ton of work," as a result of which his office is now current. He said he'd like to reward them with a raise. He said most cases that come through the DA's office, excepting complex crime, are resolved within a year from date of arraignment. He noted this he is still five Assistant DAs short. He conceded that, compared to other counties, his staffing is "rather lean, but that's OK."

Second, Baratta wants to eliminate two  FT Clerical Technician 3 Positions and replace them with one  FT Case Management Assistant Administrator/Data Analyst Position and one FT Paralegal/Clerical Specialist Position. - A clerical tech in his office recently graduated as a paralegal and he plans to make her more active with file management, discovery and the use of power point in a courtroom, a mystery to many older lawyers. Another clerical tech is actually designing software upgrades that will save the county hundreds of thousands of dollars. She will maintain and continue to upgrade. "We're gonna' make out like bandits," said Baratta, who should know a thing or two about bandits/

Third, the DA wants to upgrade one FT Office Supervisor Position and one FT Administrative Assistant Position. 

Fourth, upgrade one FT Child Abuse Coordinator/Victim Advocate Position. He said the previous occupant of that position is one of the three who were caught up in an overtime "debacle" and is "gone." Funds for this are fully paid through a grant. 

The salaries paid for these upgrades were not really discussed, and we'll see what the new salaries are at Council's meeting tonight

NorCo DA Steve Baratta Has a 17-Person Prosecutorial Squad

At Northampton County Council's July 18, 2024. meeting, District Attorney Stephen Baratta discussed his staffing. He indicated he was slotted for 22 full-time assistants when he first took office but converted two of those positions to part-time slots. He indicated his "sweet spot" for dealing with what he calls a "significant backlog" is to have 17 or 18 full-time prosecutors and two part-time prosecutors. 

As of yesterday, he reports having a covey of 17 prosecutors, which I'm listing below. He hopes to hire one or two law school graduates over the summer. He told County Council that he will seek no additional money beyond what is allotted to him this year and plans to seek no increase in next year's budget. 

NorCo ADA List 8.5.24 by BernieOHare on Scribd

Why NorCo Administrators Stopped Baratta's Detective Hire

I told you yesterday that NorCo DA Steve Baratta wants to hire a retiring Bethlehem police officer to add to his stable of county detectives. At the same time, he proposed giving all county detectives what amounts to a 15% payhike over what they are currently paid. But when Baratta and First Assistant Bob Eyer appeared before County Council last week, a resolution that authorized the hire and salary increases was missing. That's because Executive Lamont McClure pulled it. He had good reason to do so.

One of my readers slammed McClure: "He must have it his way and will push back on anything that doesn't get him donors or publicity." But as McClure himself advised Council, county detectives are in a collective bargaining agreement, and the county administration is the sole bargaining agent when it comes to doling out money. 

This appears specifically in the Home Rule Charter's enumeration of the powers of the Executive branch. Among them is the authority to "supervise and direct the negotiation and administration of any collective bargaining agreements with employees ... ." This applies to all union contracts, including the courts and the DA. 

Without question, as an independently elected official, the District Attorney has authority to hire and fire. But he has no authority to raise or lower salaries. That is the province of County Council. If a union contract is involved, it is the province of both the Executive and County Council. The Executive negotiates. County Council approves any collective bargaining agreement. 

Baratta argued that he has the right to "move pieces" as he sees fit so long as he stays within his budget. But that view is wrong. Under the Home Rule Charter, they, and not he, set the salaries.  

In addition to defending the Home Rule Charter, McClure has another reason to put the brakes on Baratta's proposal. Baratta is proposing a 15% wage hike for detectives who already are paid pretty well and drive a county car home every night. He is doing this just as contract negotiations are beginning for a new contract. How does he justify this to Human Services workers who are also getting 15% raises, but spaced out over three years? How does he justify this to other county workers? And how does he justify it to county taxpayers? 

County Council solicitor Chris Spadoni told Baratta last week to just prepare his own resolution so County Council can vote on it. That would also be a mistake and would be just as meaningless as the various toothless resolutions being hurled at County Council in recent weeks. 

Pen Argyl Resident Arrested For Eight Burglaries Late Last Year

I was unable to attend a news conference conducted yesterday by NorCo DA Steve Baratta because I'm getting a series of goofy tests done in advance of an eye operation I'll be getting next week. His office was kind enough to forward a news release announcing the arrest of Pen Argyl resident Shane Lake, who's been accused in a string of eight burglaries last year. I thought I'd share it with you. 

NorCo DA: Pen Argyl Resident Accused in String of Eight Burglaries by bernieohareiii on Scribd

Steve Baratta, Union Buster

NorCo DA-Elect Steve Baratta ran as a Democrat. During his campaign, he staked out positions that are a bit left of center, at least for prosecutors. He opposed the death penalty. He'd decriminalize possession of marijuana. He opposes cash bail for many crimes. He refused to wage a write-in campaign as a Republican, and criticized incumbent Terry Houck for doing so. But before he's even sworn into office, he's taking a very Republican position. He's a union basher. I've told you about his decision to terminate two highly regarded county detectives protected by a union contract that specifically requires "just cause" for their removal. He just happened to pick the two detectives who negotiate the contract. If he gets away with this, no unionized worker is safe in his office. That includes all the clerks. Like the detectives, they can be fired at any time for any reason, including a bad reason.  

When I spoke to Baratta, he told me that the law supports his expansive view of his power to hire and fire, regardless of any union contract.  Let's look at the law. 

Pennsylvania's Constitution, like the US Constitution, provides for three separate, equal and independent branches of government - judiciary, executive and legislative. It specifically reserves to the courts the right to supervise their own employees. (Article V, Sec. 10.)  This is why many unionized court workers are still considered "at will." 

Like the courts, the office of District Attorney is also established by Pa,'s Constitution, (Article IX, Sec. 4). It would be a part of the executive branch, not the courts. No constitutional provision gives that office the exclusive power to hire and fire its staff.      

State law, however, does throw a monkey wrench into things. The County Code (Section 1620) provides that the "salary board" (Executive and County Council) have the sole power to negotiate with unions representing court workers as well as other staff for other elected or even appointed officers. But it goes on to provide that this "shall in no way affect the hiring, discharging and supervising rights and obligations with respect to such employes as may be vested in the judges or other county officers."

A strict reading of this statute suggests that no county union is safe, regardless of any "just cause" provisions in a collective bargaining agreement.  A Northampton County Corrections Director who is appointed by the Executive and confirmed by County Council, could ignore union contracts negotiated by his boss. So could a constitutional row officer like the Prothonotary.  This is precisely the rationale being advanced by Baratta. 

The law should never be interpreted to produce absurd results. Let me give you an example. Law provides that a person who breaks out of prison commits a felony, but no prisoner will be prosecuted if he escapes because the jailhouse is on fire. As one English judge pithily reasoned, "he is not to be hanged because he would not stay to be burnt." 

I'll concede that an independently elected District Attorney stands in a superior position to a row officer appointed by the county. He can argue that he has the exclusive right (by statute, not Constitution) to hire, fire and supervise. But he has to assert that right when the contract is being negotiated.  In one Berks County case, an elected row officers actually notified the "salary board" (County Commissioners) that "I do not authorize any negotiation on behalf of myself in regard to the hiring, termination or supervision of employees in my office." In another Lackawanna County case involving a contract negotiated by deputy Sheriffs, the Sheriff was uninvolved in negotiations. In stark contrast to those cases, incumbent District Attorney Terry Houck accepted collective bargaining agreements. Abd Baratta was on the bench. 

Baratta might be able to argue that he must be consulted before any new contract is negotiated with detectives or his clerical staff. But he's unable to unilaterally change the terms of a contract that was agreed upon before he even assumed office. 

What Baratta is actually doing is undermining the morale of his office before he steps foot inside the door. He could have made better use of his time by familiarizing himself with several ongoing investigations and prosecutions.   

Union Contract With County Detectives Requires "Just Cause" for Termination

On Tuesday, I told you that NorCo DA elect Steve Baratta has notified two assistant DAs and two county detectives to clear out by January 2, the day he is sworn in. He did so without prior discussion with any of them. The assistant DAs are "at will" and serve at then pleasure of the District Attorney, so there's little they can do,. But the county detectives are a different story. They have a collective bargaining agreement with the county. Baratta dismissed that concern, stating the union contract is for wages and benefits only./ He adds that they are considered exempt employees. Baratta should have looked at the union contract before lowering the boom on these detectives.

Before I get into that, I decline to name these detectives. They rightly feel their reputations have been sullied even though both of them have been dedicated law enforcement professionals their entire careers. In fact, I consider these two detectives the best in the county's bureau. They scare even me. Whenever either of them looks at me, I plead guilty. 

The union contract with the county detectives provides very specifically that they can be terminated only for "just cause."  Before that happens, they would have to be afforded due process, which includes a Loudermill hearing. They also have a right to file a grievance and seek an arbitration of their contractual right to continued employment. There are unions, mostly for judicial employees, in which members can still be terminated at will. Given the specific language of this collective bargaining agreement, however, I believe Baratta is mistaken. If there is any ambiguity, and I don't think there is, it would have to be resolved in favor of the injured detectives. 

In addition to being wrong about the union contract, Baratta's belief that these are exempt employees is another mistake. In 2008, Human Resources notified then DA John Morgaelii that county detectives could no longer be considered "exempt" under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Jan 28, 2008 memo specifically states that, "effective immediately the position of County Detective is reclassified as FLSA nonexempt." 

Baratta is starting his tenure as DA by alienating both the existing prosecutors as well as the detective bureau. 

What's Going on in the Lance Wheeler Case?

Wheeler returned to donation drive
after his arrest

According to both Lehigh Valley Live and Lehigh Valley News. Lance Wheeler was arrested by Wilson Borough police on May 31 while conducting a donation drive for the Ferry Street fire victims. Easton City Council member Taiba Sultana was there, shot a video of the actual arrest, and said she was outraged. For his part, Wheeler insisted on being cuffed and led away, even though he had previously been given several opportunities to surrender voluntarily. He wanted a show, and could be heard blaming both DA Terry Houck and Easton Mayor Sal Panto.  According to the news accounts, the arrest stems from an incident last August, when Wheeler allegedly threatened three students while driving a Wilson Area School District van. What's happened since Wheeler's arrest? Nothing. 

Preliminary hearings have been scheduled in this case for June 21, July 11, August 23, October 20 and November 30. They've all been continued. Wheeler's lawyer, Glennis Clark, also represented some of the Commonwealth witnesses who appeared before the Grand Jury. This raised the possibility of a conflict, and that question was booted to President Judge Craig Dally. 

Is Wheeler stringing this case out, hoping for more favorable winds when Steve Baratta is sworn in as District Attorney?  You won't see Lance's name on any campaign finance reports, but it's no secret that he was a big Baratta backer. He took Steve through Easton's west ward, introducing him to voters. He also introduced Baratta to one of the warring factions in the Sikh Temple dispute in Lower Nazareth Tp. Wheeler provided security there.   

Wheeler told me believed his arrest was politically motivated because he supported Steve Baratta for DA, and is the person who encouraged the Sikhs in Lower Nazareth to reach out to him. He also blamed Easton Mayor Sal Panto, although I'm unsure how Panto can issue orders to Wilson Borough police. 

At his most recent appearance, I'm told Wheeler shouted out to prosecutors and detectives that they'd be gone next month. Not long after that, one of the detectives and prosecutors involved received a letter from Baratta telling them to have their personal belongings out of the courthouse by January 2. 

When I spoke to Baratta this week, he told me he knew nothing about the Wheeler case. I have no reason to doubt him or his personal integrity But Wheeler's alleged remarks, which I only learned about yesterday, combined with his active support for Baratta, raises a serious concern whether Baratta should handle the prosecution or have the state attorney general oversee the case. 

"Caesar's wife must be above suspicion." The same is true of Baratta.

Baratta Gives Two Assistant DAs and Two County Detectives Their Walking Papers

Some anonymous comments posted here allege that District Attorney elect Steve Baratta has notified two assistant District Attorneys and two County Detectives that their services are no longer needed. I reached out to Baratta and he confirms that he is, in fact, discharging these prosecutors and detectives.   

Assistant DAs serve at the pleasure of the District Attorney and are "at-will" positions. They can be terminated for any reason or no reason so long as there is no violation of important public policy. 

Unlike Assistant DAs, county detectives are unionized. Does that afford them some protection? According to Baratta, No. He contends that they collectively bargain for wages and benefits, but are still considered "exempt" or "at will" employees.

He stated that it's important that he has his own people in place when he assumes office.  I've heard and expect that he will announce some of these people in the coming days. 

Baratta Officially Unopposed in NorCo DA Race

On Friday evening, a reader took me to task for failing to report that county Republicans have named no candidate to oppose Democratic nominee Steve Baratta in this year's DA race. Actually, this blog was the first media outlet to inform you that Terry Houck, who won the Republican nomination as a result of a write-in campaign, had withdrawn. At that time, I added that Republicans had a limited amount of time to come up with a substitute. The sands in that hourglass emptied on Thursday with no nominee. This means that Baratta is the sole candidate running in this race. Is it possible he could lose as a reesult of a write-in campaign? Yes, but that is highly unlikely. 

Terry Houck Withdraws as NorCo DA Candidate

Northampton County District Attorney Terry Houck has notified the elections office that he is withdrawing his candidacy for re-election.  Today was the last day on which he could withdraw. No independent candidate has filed nomination papers. This means that Stephen Baratta, the Democratic nominee, will be NorCo's next District Attorney. 

Houck, a Democrat, lost the Democratic primary to Baratta on May 16.  He won the Republican nomination as a result of a write-in campaign but refused to change his party affiliation. As a result, neither party would back him in the general election. 

In addition to being a man without a party, Houck was hamstrung by a lack of resources needed to wage a competitive campaign. 

Houck has yet to pursue other employment opportunities. 

Though Baratta was a judge for a quarter-century, he waged a hard-hitting and, at times, an ugly campaign. Houck has spent over 40 years in law enforcement, both as a police officer and as a professional prosecutor.  

Houck's departure from the race is a simple recognition that his re-election would be impossible and would expose his family to more of the brutal attacks they endured in the primary. It is nevertheless a blow to democracy. 

Money wins over merit.  

Local Republicans have until 75 days prior to the election to submit another candidate.  

Following the Money: Baratta Campaign Finance Reports Show Need For Limits

Friday night, I posted the post-primary campaign finance reports filed by Steve Baratta and Terry Houck in Northampton County's DA race. (The pre-primary reports are here). These reports enable us to see who is behind each race and how candidates are spending their money. If you include in-kind contributions, over $422,000 has been spent so far in this race. I've learned the following

1. Big Money Has Returned to Local Political Campaigns. - For a few years after disgraced Allentown Mayor Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski was convicted of bribery, a lot of donors were very hesitant to give money to anyone. It's safe to say big money has returned. They include many of the very same people who once contributed to Fed Ed. They include NZ twins J.B. Reilly and Joe Topper, who gave $10,000 each to Baratta. They include Abe Atiyeh, who gave $5,000 to Houck. If they wanted to contribute to Joe Biden or Donald Trump, they'd be limited to $3,300. But incredibly, there are no limits in local races. This enables a few deep pockets to buy a race.. 

2. Immigration lawyer Ray Lahoud Emerges as Kingmaker. - Out of the blue - or perhaps I should say out of the red because he's a registered Republican - immigration lawyer Ray Lahoud has suddenly emerged as a big spender in political races. In 2022, he gave $3 million to SuperPACs across the country, putting him at #57 nationwide. In this contest, he provided $10,000 in money and spent $62,301 with in-kind contributions for robo calls, TV advertising, polling and digital and social media ads. He alone is responsible for $72,000 of Baratta's spending. He's also been a bundler. That's a person who gets contributions from others like JB Reilly and Joe Topper. 

While Ray makes too much money to want the job as top assistant, and I have no reason to believe he has any nefarious designs, it's pretty clear that he will have unlimited access should Baratta win the general.

Ray told me he plans to continue spending. 

If this spending tells you anything, it's that we need the state legislature to step forward and start to impose limits on spending in local or state races. I do not fault Baratta or Lahoud. They are playing by the rules. I'm sure Houck would only be too happy to allow  someone to spend $72,000 on his behalf. But this dilutes democracy by enabling one person or a special few to buy political races. 

Pennsylvania is one of just 11 states that impose no limits on campaign spending.

Blogger's Note: Friday was the due date for post primary campaign finance reports. I have many of them, but had to leave the courthouse before the quitting bell tolled. I will get the rest on Tuesday, when the courthouse re-opens, and will start telling you about the remaining races then.  

Following the Money: Post-Primary Reports Filed By NorCo DA Candidates Baratta & Houck

Below are  the Post-Primary finance reports filed by incumbent Terry Houck and challenger Steve Baratta in the NorCo District Attorney's race. They report how much money they've raised since they filed their Pre-Primary reports (you can see them here), and how that money has been spent. I've load them in their entirety, redacting only their signatures and phone numbers. Please feel free to share any observation in the comments. This is participatory journalism. Some of you are going to see things I miss.  I'll take your comments and provide an analysis on Tuesday. 

Baratta

During the period between January 4 and May 1, Baratta raised $131,875 as well as in-kind contributions of $49,501.69. He spent $115,433.37 

Between May 2 and June 5, Baratta raised an additional $44,817.94, as well as in-kind contributions of $29.020.84. He spent $69,718.48, and is left with $849.06.

In total, Baratta raised $255,215.47, and spent $185,151.84. 

Houck

During the period between January 4 and May 1, Houck raised $64,026. Adding that to cash on hand from his previous race, Houck had $99,363.39 as well as in-kind contributions of $2,478.36. He spent $87,760.82..

For the period between May 2 and June 5, Houck raised $39,252.00 and received  in-kind contributions of $10,513.64. He spent 449,395.24, and is left with $1,459.33.

In total, Houck raised $116,270 and spent $137.156.06

Baratta outraised Houck more than two to one, and was able to outspend Houck by nearly $48,000. 

Baratta Post Primary Campaign Finance Report by BernieOHare on Scribd

Houck Post Primary Campaign Finance Report by BernieOHare on Scribd

Baratta Sought GOP Write-in, Misled Morning Call

NorCo DA candidate Steve Baratta was highly critical of DA Terry Houck for waging a Republican write-in campaign during a debate hosted by public television. After it was over, he told The Morning Call he'd seek no GOP write in votes. “If I lose as a Democrat, I’m going home,” Baratta told reporter Tony Salamone. “If the Democratic party doesn’t want me, then I have to find different work." What he said and he did are two different things. Contrary to what Baratta told The Morning Call, he waged a Republican write-in campaign. The document below, filed with the elections office, indicates quite clearly that Baratta declared himself a Republican write-in candidate, and supplied numerous variations of his name. 

Baratta v Houck - The Sequel

Blogger's Note: I am discussing unofficial results.  They will not be official until certified by the Elections Comm'n. 

As I made you aware late yesterday afternoon, there will be a contested District Attorney's race this November. Steve Baratta secured the Democratic nomination after defeating Terry Houck, 12,943 to 10,799. But Houck won a write-in campaign on the Republican side of the fence. He needed 250 votes minimum, and secured 1,468 of 2,118 write-in votes. There were 650 "not assigned" write-ins. 

Terry Houck remains a centrist Democrat.  He refuses to switch parties just to appease some party machine. He will be driving the red car, but it will be fueled by blue gas. 

Baratta will be driving the blue car, but as his expense report makes clear, it will be fueled by red gas, That red gas includes $20,000 from Republican NIZ developers J.B. Reilly and Joe Topper and a whopping $47,900 in cash and in-kinds from Norris, McLaughlin lawyer Ray Lahoud,

NorCo DA Election: Baratta Snags Dem Nod, But Houck Likely Captured GOP Write-In

On Monday, I told you all the reasons why DA Terry Houck would win his re-election campaign.  Once again, I was the kiss of death. But I stand by that prediction. It's just going to take a bit longer than I thought. I did expect Terry to prevail, but Steve Baratta won the Democratic nomination rather handily, both in mail-in ballots and in-person voting. He garnered 12,932 votes to 10,792 for Terry. He got 54% of the Democrats. 

I congratulate Steve for his victory, but it's pyrrhic,  This race will continue. That's because there are 2,118 Republican write-ins to be canvassed. Once that happens, it's very likely that Terry Houck, a Democrat, will be the Republican nominee. 

If he keeps his Democratic support, he should win in November. Houck wants to represent everyone. Baratta has made clear he's only interested in Democrats. 

Ray Lahoud, a major Baratta donor and supporter, told me he intends to challenge every single write-in vote that went to Houck.  

You can see the election results here. 

Merciless Morganelli v. Bonecrusher Baratta

Bonecrusher Baratta with his cutman, Jill Cicero

One thing that really pisses me off during a public meeting is idiots in the peanut gallery who heckle or shout down other speakers. At yesterday's budget hearing, DA John Morganelli was taunted close to the end of an admittedly lengthy presentation about a disparity in wage increases for nonunion workers in next year's budget. I turned to tell this moron to knock it off, but changed my mind pretty quickly. It was our frickin' President Judge, Steve Baratta!  Having no desire to be sentenced to 20 years in the electric chair, which I probably deserve, I decided I really love the give and take of democracy. What I loved even more is that the District Attorney and President Judge were about to cross swords.

I had heard earlier in the day that battle lines were being drawn between Merciless Morganelli and Bonecrusher Baratta. These two guys are actually quite friendly. Baratta was Morganelli's First Assistant many moons ago. They both like to get to work early and can often be seen together early in the day, drinking coffee. But both are fearless advocates for their own departments, and tend to take no prisoners. So I loaded up on popcorn and waited for the show to begin.

In the DA's office, only 24 employees are left who don't belong to one or another of 11 different unions. Even the Detectives have their own union. Morganelli's 20 assistant DAs, two victim advocates and two secretaries are all that's left of nonunion employees in his department.

Earlier in the budget season, Executive John Brown met with Morganelli and asked him to limit his raises for these employees to just 2.5%. He was assured that all non-union employees would be getting the same raise. Wanting to be a team player, he agreed.

But that's not what happened. Nonunion judicial employees got a 4.5% raise instead of the 2.5% doled out to everyone else. Brown had apparently made the same request to Baratta, but the judge thought his nonunion workers deserve more.

When he spoke, Morganelli made clear that he thinks Judge Baratta's 4.5% request is "justifiable" and "understandable." But he was under the impression that "non-union employees were going to treated equally. ... I'm in favor of the 4.5% that the judge is asking, but I think it should be across the board." He warned Council that his assistant DAs could decide to unionize, as has happened in several other counties. He said there should be "consistency."

Morganelli's points were well made and he actually complimented Baratta for doing a better job of persuading Brown than he did.

Hayden Phillips has asked our new HR Director, Amy Trapp, to run the numbers on a 2.5% raise in Morganelli's office v. a 4.5% raise. He also wants a county-wide report on the difference.

"Why don't we just do 4.5% across the board?" asked Ken Kraft.

Brown stated that about 500 employees, 25% of the county workforce, are non-union. He warned that a 4.5% increase across the board would crate a "precedent" and "set an expectation." He said every percentage change in salary costs the County $1 million. So 4.5% across the board salary increase for non-union workers would cost $4.5 million, and in addition, would cost the County $2.5 million in benefits.

After Morganelli finished, he took off while President Judge Baratta had to sit and wait as Council went through several other departments. Recognizing that an independent branch of government should be given a little more deference, Lamont McClure asked Peg Ferraro to take the courts' budget ahead of when it was scheduled for review.

"I feel like the race started about an hour ago, and I'm just allowed to start running right now," he complained. Baratta explained that he made it clear to Brown that he wanted a 4.5% increase for his non-union staff, and Brown told him he could make his case to Council.

Baratta immediately went on the attack, claiming that Morgnelli just got a 4.5% wage increase for his secretaries in April. "Now they're also going to get 2.5, which will give them a seven per cent increase that the other non-union secretaries don't get. So I'm really not sure why it is that he takes offense to my coming here trying to protect my non-union employees." He went on to say that there is an "incredible salary compression" between nonunion and union employees. He said that Juvenile Center Supervisors, the equivalent of Lieutenants at the jail, have gone years without a raise. Unlike those Lieutenants, they must be college graduates and are start at about $38,000. A Lieutenant's starting salary is $48,000, according to Baratta. Union employees supervised by these Juvenile Center Supervisors make more money.

"It's not like we're being greedy or acting as though we're special," he said. "I think it's a little unfair of [Morganelli] to stand up here and try to take the high road and say we're being pigs about this."

I don't know what planet Judge Baratta was on when Morganelli was speaking, but it wasn't Earth. The DA only argued for consistency, and actually praised Baratta. For some reason, the PJ construed a request for parity as an objection.

He finished by saying he would be doing a disservice to his own staff if he failed to advocate on their behalf "for what I feel is a reasonable increase."

Judge Baratta has approximately 78 non-union employees. A 4.5% salary increase to non-union workers will cost the county $68,000.

Actually, the real problem here is not Morganelli or Baratta. It's a Human Relations Department that has failed to implement new pay scales on the basis of periodic salary studies In addition, it is an inexperienced administration that has been too willing to let union contracts be decided at arbitration instead of negotiating.. That's what causes the salary compression mentioned by Judge Baratta.

Still it was great fun to watch these guys go at it. I'd declare Merciless Morganelli the winner by decision. He kept his cool while Bonecrusher Baratta lost his. But if I see Baratta, I'll tell him he won and that Morganelli was very unfair. .