Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMM - Meeting Minutes - 3-S - 1-20-1972 - SALARY1 E SALARY MINUTE BOOK . 47 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC. JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS Minute No. 3-S Office of the County Commissioners Washington, Pa., January 20, 1972 The Salary Board of the County of Washington met in the Office of the County Commissioners with the following members being present: Commissioners Jones; Paluso; and Flynn and Controller Elish. Also present being: Chief Clerk Murphy; County Solicitor Capano; Assistant County Solicitor Hormell; Judge DiSalle; Judge Marino; Treasurer Morgan; Sheriff Debreczeni; Reporter Roule of the Monongahela Publishing Company; Reporter Liesch of the Brownsville Telegraph; Reporter Robertson of the Observer -Reporter; Jack Merdian of WJPA; and Public Information Officer Huber. Meeting called to order by Chairman and roll call taken: Mr, Jones - Present; Mr. Paluso - Present; Mr. Elish - Present; Mr. Flynn - Present. Chairman asked if there were any corrections, additions or omissions to Minute No. 2-S,. each Commissioner and County Controller having received copies. Moved by Mr. Elish, seconded by Mr. Jones, that Minute No. 2-S be approved, as read. COURTS: Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. Chief Clerk read correspondence under date of January 5, 1972, requesting a salary increase from $212. 00 bi-weekly, for Mary Francis, secretary to Judge DiSalle, which will put her on the same level as other judicial secretaries. It was the understanding at the time she was employed that this adjustment would be forthcoming. Judge DiSalle stated that Mrs. Francis is an excellent secretary, who has heal many years of experience. Remarks: Mr. Flynn: You have heard the gentleman's request. Judge DiSalle: I would only add that in the light that she has been with me since last April, which is almost a year now, I think this would put her in the same level as secretaries for the other judges. I don't know what this is - approximately one increment or two. Mr. Flynn: No, that's several increments. I understand we have agenda meetings on this - �.48 BALA'RY':MINU"TE BOOK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN', JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS we discuss them and don't take action. The question was raised of this confirming to the policy adopted by the Wage Price Policy Board of 5. 5%. I explained to you gentlemen, and rightly so, that we discussed this. The fact is that when she was appointed by you she was previously a court secretary prior to that. I don't recall what Judge she worked for, but she was up there for a number of years and the understanding was that after a period of time she would be elevated up to the same salary position as the other secretaries the judges have. Again, the question was raised about whether or not we are within rights with this 5. 5%. Judge DiSalle: Well, I don't see that that's a problem, because, as I say, it's not an in- crease that puts her above anybody else and the understanding was this when she was employed,. I thought this was a matter of fact. Its really my fault that this wasn't taken care of months ago. Judge Gladden's secretary is making $230. 00 and every other judicial secretary in the building is making this much. I don't think it's fair to her, considering her years of exper- ience. Mr. Flynn: Well, the first question which is raised sir - is there money in your budget to take care of it ? Judge DiSalle: I'm sure there is. Mr. Jones: Let me ask a question. When you go to draw your budget up for your court upstairs, Judge, does the President Judge do this or do all the judges work together on the budget for the Courts. Judge DiSalle: Well, initially he compiles the information. Mr. Jones: Then there would be money in here for this? Mr. Flynn: Judge DiSalle, if there is no objection from you and no objections from the Board, I would like to bring in the problems confronting Judge Marino, also. Judge DiSalle: If you are looking at it in terms of budgeting, I'd like to remind you Judge Marino's budget is separate. Mr. Flynn: At our last meeting, Judge Sweet came to this Board. Let me read this, "The chairman read memorandum under date of January 3, which I received from the Presid- ent Judge stating that they are having a little difficulty with the proposed reductions in forces and budgetary levels and asking that they be placed at the end of Thursday's schedule for 4y Salary Board, which the gentleman came into. " Now for your information, Judge Marino, at no time did any member of this Board, to the best of my knowledge ever make mention of any individual's name. Judge Sweet, according to these minutes refers to the Kopko Case and the Kopko Case is strictly of his thinking, it is not of this Board. Judge Sweet spoke of "the inadequate amount of money in the Orphans Court Budget" and he goes on to say "There u C� 1 SALARY MINUTE BOOK. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEYEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS are areas in other branches of his budget whereby there is money available". He refers to Line 125 (I suppose he is referring to Account 125) Orphans' Court and he moved that 'it is the judgment of the Salary Board that the Orphans' Court shall be served by five employees in their present (1971) positions. " Since then, I have requested from our legal department, Mr. Hormell in particular, to give us a ruling. Keep'in mind that the records show that Judge Sweet indicated that there was available moneys in other accounts. He is speaking about Account 126, Mr. Hormell has prepared an opinion and my two associates have received aaopy of it. Mr. Flynn made reference to parts of an opinion handed down by Oliver N. Hormell, Esq. , Assistant County Solicitor, in re: Budget for Court of Common Pleas. (said opinion made a part of the minutes on page 4 a) In Conclusion: Mr. Flynn: What the gentleman is saying in effect is that insofar as the budget is concerned it is obsolete. You take Account 125 (Orphans' Court) and combine it with Account 126 (General Courts) - the combined total amounts to better than $300, 000. 00 for the operation of the courts. Now, the point I'm trying to amke is to inform you that nobody has raised the question about any individual name. It's the overall picture. Now, the question was raised about budgetary outings. The President Judge indicated in the record that there is fat available in Account 126. Judge DiSalle: I assumed that there was money in the budget. As far as the Wage Price Freeze is concerned, I can't see why there is any objection or anything to prevent the action being taken. It is somewhat standard policy that antemployee would start at a somewhat lower salary and then be brought up to the same level as people doing comparable work. I think it would be unfair to Mrs. Francis to have her working at a salary which is less than 11 - ( , girls at the same level, and she has had more experience than most of them. Mr. Paluso: It doesn't make sense tome either, for her to be employed at the same job as everybody else and receiving less salary. Moved by Judge DiSalle, seconded by Mr. Elish, that Mary Francis, Secretary to Judge DiSalle, receive an increase in salary from $212. 00 bi-weekly to $230. 00 bi-weekly, effective January 24, 1972, subject to the approval of the Pay Board. Roll call vote taken: > Judge DiSalle - Yes; Mr. Jones - No; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - No. Motion carried. fl aU SALAARY,MINUTE,,Bao,K BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS January 11, 1972 The Honorable Michael R Flynn, Chairman Board of County Commissioners Washington County Court House Washington, Pennsylvania 15301 In Re: Budget for Court of Common Pleas Dear Mr. Flynn: Pursuant to you instructions and request from me there follows an outline of the law and the obligations of the County Commissioners with respect to the budget for the County Courts. The procedure for the preparation and adoption of annual county budgets is pre- scribed by law. The statute requires the County Controller to prepare a comparative state- ment of revenues and expenditures for the current and immediately preceding fiscal year, and certain other information, and transmission of such information to the County Commissioners for their use in preparing a budget. A proposed budget is not controlling on the Commissioners in their fixing of a rate of taxation. An adopted budget, on.the other hand, is more than a mere estimate of probable revenues and expenditures, and is a method whereby expenditures are controlled and limited during a particular fiscal period, though the County Commissioners cannot, by means of.the adoption ofabudget, limit or avoid liabilities which are rightfully upon the county. (9 P. L. E. 406) From our analysis of the problem there seems to be two reasons for it as follows: 1. The obsolescence of budget forms, and 2. The failure to consider all courts as one unit as the Constitution now provides they shall be considered. The forms which are used for the preparation of a budget are supplied by the Secretary of Community Affairs. The statute provides that these forms are to be uniform forms prepared by a committee consisting of three members from the Pennsylvania State Association of County Commissioners, three members from the Pennsylvania State Association of Controllers, one member from the Senate, one member from the House of Representatives, and the Secretary of Community Affairs or his agent. The committee by statute is to meet at the call of the Secretary of Community Affairs of his agent. (16 P. S. 1785) At the present time our county engages in what is known as "Account Number" budgeting with each office or phase of county government under the budget being assigned a specific number. This is in accordance with a format from the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Act 396 of 1937, Act 230 of 1953, and Act 130 of 1955. The last time that the forms used in our county were updated was in 1955. On this form, Lone 125 is designated as Orphans' Court budget and Line 126 is designated as All Other Courts. Since 1955, however, there has been a constitutional amendment which provides that there is not an Orphan's Court, but that the Orphans' Court is now a division of the Court of Common Pleas. Similarly, since 1955, the constitutional office of Magistrate has been created and the budget for these offices are found on Line 127 in the county budget. You will recall that the last time Judge Marino ran for re-election, he was elected as a Common Pleas Judge. Prior thereto, Judge Marino was the President Judge of the Orphans' Court. Now the Orphans' Court is a division of the Court of Common Pleas. I presume that Judge Marino was either assigned to the Orphans' Court division by the President Judge or occupies that division by his request, or at the request of the Court en Banc. There are some matters other than budgetary matters relating to this new classifica,tio:i nor pertinent to this problem. However, 1 would call to your attention, that I am informed that in Dauphin County a Judge who was previously the Judge of the Orphans' Court was elect- ed a Judge of the Common Pleas Court, and because he had more seniority than.the other Judges, he became the President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County. I 1 1 1 0 1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEYEC. JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS do not know what procedure has been adopted with our courts or what the situation is relative to that matter here in Washington County. This is a matter which would be decided by the court itself. A problem similar to the one presented to you was created because the form for budgets had no place for magisterial districts, but merely has a place for "Justices and Aldermen". The old form further provides a place for personal service's, other services, and material supplies for Justices of the Peace and Aldermen. It is important to note, however, that there is no provision on said forms for capital outlay and that the Administrative Assistant had to write this number in on the present budget. It is further important to know that for the next two years we will continue to have old Justices of the Peace and there had to be written in to the budget a place for old J. P. fees. This is a situation which is analagous to our courts since the salaries of Magistrates are paid by the State (as are our Judges) but other costs of operation our paid by the county (as with our courts). It is obvious in view of the above that a decision, therefore, on proper budgetary matters cannot be made by identifying an item as No. 125, 126, or 127. Since this matter and question involved administrative details,, your Administra- tive Assistant, Mr. Whalen, contacted Mr. Donald Herbster of the Municipal Statistics and Records Division of the Department of Community Affairs. Mr. Herbster advised Mr. Whalers that there could be no change in forms until the forms committee was activated and up to this time there has been no request for such activation. I call your attention to the fact that as previously stated,in this letter, a meeting of the forms committee: can be called at the request of the Secretary of Community Affairs. Mr. Herbster suggested that this matter be taken up with Mr. Robert Budd, the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Association of County Commissioners. It is my understanding that you will be meeting with this Association on January 23, 24, and 25 of 1972. At that time, I suggest that you have Mr. Whalen present this matter to Mr. Budd so that he can request the forms committee to be called into session, and correct these obvious deficiencies, so that this problem will not exist when you prepare and adopt the budget for next year. In the meantime Mr. Herbster suggested that the County Solicitor should rule on this matter, and that "Common Sense .should prevail"., In'view• of the -method by which Line 127 as outlined above was handled, I am of the opinion that all of the Courts should be considered as one unit. Otherwise, we, are violating the Constitution andicreating problems such as that with which you are presently faced. This now leads to a consideration of the question as to the propriety of the County Commissioners selecting personnel or discharging personnel for the court. This is not a function which the County Commissioners can perform, and the selection of personnel by the court is a court function solely, subject only to the approval of the salary for the person selected by the Salary Board. The only requirement of the County Commissioners is that they will appropriate a sufficient amount of .money to permit the courts to function in a proper manner. In view of what has been said before in this opinion, the amount of money appropria- ted for the Orphans' Court should therefore be considered with the total amount of money appropriated for all courts, and all of the Judges should and do have the right to select per- sonnel for the courts, subject only to the amount of money appropriated for the courts, if the court does not believe that the amount of money appropriated is sufficient, an Action of Mandamous will lie to enforce a sufficient appropriateion. The County Commissioners are required to appropriate sufficient funds to meet constitutional and statutory obligations and they can be compelled to do so by,Mandamus. (Kistler v. Carbon County, 154 Pa. Super. 299, 1944) Although I have not given a citation for the same I seem to recall that a court in Philadelphia County successfully used Mandamus to force the proper officials to appropriate sufficient funds for the operation of the county. In any event, this has been the case for almost thirty years in Pennsylvania. (Kistler v. Carbon, -Supra) In summary, my opinion as to the action to.be taken is as follows: 1. , Take steps to have the; uniform .budget forms brought up to date so that they comply with the present constitution, and SALARY MINUTE -Bata K BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS 2. Advise the court that the selection, retention, or discharge of any specific personnel, is a function of the court, and not of the Board of County Commissioners, subject only to a salary being set by the Salary Board, and 3. If the Court is not satisfied with this, procedure, the Courts may order you to do otherwise-. - Of course, in the event of such an order, the burden of proving the need for personnel ,or other expense items would be upon.the Court., I hope that the above gives you all of the information you requested. If there is any further information you need, please advise. Very truly yours, /s / Oliver N. Hoirmell , 1 Oliver N Hormell Assistant County Solicitor Mr. Hormell: I think that the comments of both Judge DiSalle and Judge Marino are very well taken. From both personal and professional experience, I know that it is necessary to have the things done he is,talking about.. I•would call the Chairman's attention to the fact that in the opinion which he read, II cited the case of Kistler vs. Carbon County, which is an old case and since that time there has been a case of Carroll vs. Tate. There is no question about it, the Board of County Commissioners does not have the authority to hamper or hinder in any way the proper function of the Courts. You must appropriate sufficient funds to meet you constitutional and statutory obligations, But what this opinion says, is I that the Orphans' Court Budget and the Common Pleas Budget must all be considered together to determine the needs of all the judges and all the personnel as they determine,it, and if they feel after having made such determination that you were interfering with the proper judicial function and then unquestionable they have the power to order you to do otherwise. I thought I'd better interject this at •this point, because of the tentative the conversation is taking. Mr. Flynn: I just want the records to show and I want Judge Marino to be aware of the fact that when you single out indiviudal names, this is not the ,action of the Board. The case referred to was originated with the President Judge. A discussion was held by the Board and Judge Marino on the Orphans' Court situation: Judge DiSalle stated that since the Orphans' Court is now a division of the Court of Common Pleas, that Court should have the same number of employees that the other Common Pleas branches have. Judge Marino stated that an investigator is not a personal, employee of the Courts and that he ha,s one less employee than the other Courts, because an investigator is a separate category. The.Adoption Act gives ,the Courts the right to appoint its own investigator for adoptions. The Orphans' Court had previously had two investigators (one for Legislative District #1 and one for Legislative District #2) and when the investigator 1 1 1 SALARY MINUTE BOOK � BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC. JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS for Legislative District #1 died, Mrs. -Kopko took over the whole load for the County.. Mr. Paluso asked if Judge Marino had a tipstaff and court crier. Judge Marino answered that when his staff was cut, his tipstaff was then made court crier. He is able to function with the help -of -,an employee:of the ,Register,of Wills who acts as his court crier during the audit of estates. I Mr. Hormel: I said that you could not interfere with a statutory or constitutional function of the ,court by cutting appropriations-. So,, that if the Courts felt that the total amount of money appropriated was inadequate to perform their functions, they had ;the right and power to order you to do so in an act of mandamus. Mr. Paluso: I don't think that's necessary.. I think we are all reasonable and intelligent enough'.to know that is a growing business (court cases). In my mind there is no question that this staff can be reduced regardless of who's ,involved. You referred to the celebrated Kopko Case. I don't think that has any bearing an it, at all. It's.a matter of is an, adequate staff to be provided for the ever-increasing work load- of the Courts. That's the decision we have to make.. Judge Marino stated that if,you separate Account 125 from the others there would not be enough money to operate on, but if both accounts are lumped together there would be enough money -to keep his employee that he has now. Judge Marino asked to keep, his staff the way it ,is for,the rest -of this year,, because this,is his last year in office and he, presumes that whoever succeeds him will be asking for changes. If we do this, we -are going to have the to supplement/ funds in Account 125. Judge DiSalle asked if money couldn't be taken out of sub -accounts for items such as materials and supplies to be used for this purpose. It was stated that this can be done as long as you stay within your 6ccount. BOARD FOR ASSESSMENT OF APPEALS: Moved by Mr.. Jones, seconded by Mr. Flynn, that the salaries of the following members of the Board for Assessment of Appeals be set as follows, effective January 24, 1972: Thomas Cox $218. 50 bi-weekly Keith Melenyzer $198. 50 bi-weekly Joseph Seibert $198. 50 bi-weekly Remarks: Mr. Paluso: Since this is a different meeting with a different set of minutes, I woulk like to repeat my remarks at the Commissioners' Board Meeting, for the benefit of the secretary, if it is all right with you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Flynn, as Chairman of the Salary Board, have I been consulted as to the makeup of the Tax Assessment Board of Appeals? Mr. Flynn: No, you haven't. st . �4 `V SALARY M I N U T .E .e ' B Q O K BOARD OF' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN' P. BEVEC, JOHN'MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS Mx. Paluso: Were any of these men placed on this board by the minority Commissioner? Mr. Flynn: No, they weren't. Mr. Paluso: Am I,to assume .that you as. Chairman named a.11 three members of this board,? Mr. Flynn: No. You are assuming. I, -as Chairman made the recommendation to, -this , entire board this morning, and it was duly acted upon and passed by the majority of this board. (said remarks made a part -of the minutes on page 7a) - - Mr. Paluso: I think that pretty well explains why I think that the minority representative should be considered. I think its defeating the purpose of the board. The board's created to try to reduce the work load of the Commissioners themselves. By doing this each member of this board should have -a personal representative, because he is, personally representing that particular commissioner at that hearing. _ He is not representing the County,. He is representing, a specific com:missionem. , Under the lcircumstances here, 1=would not have. anyone representing myself. For those reasons, I think that this motiom should be tabled and a new board be adjusted so as to contain one representative of the minority -,commissioner which happens to be myself. The same argument would apply if different circumstances prevailed in the Board of Commissioners and I would take this stance regardless. I think that when someone directly represents a person or --a County Commissioner, that person being represented has the right to chose the person who will be making decisions in his name. I, for one, will not be represented by anyone who has not had my own approval. I think that's only . a matter of morals and fairness. _ Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - No; Mr. Elisb,} No; Mr.. Flynn - Yes. Motion failed to carry because of tie. JUVENILE DETENTION HOME:' Moved by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Flynn, that a voucher be prepared in the amount of $119.00 for Daniel Luppino, Detention Home Counselor, who worked,a total of 35 Hours @ $3. 40 per hour for the, dates from January 5, 1972 - January 18, 1972, Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. :Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. (page 7a) MEMO: Re: The Board of Assessment Appeals 9 301 of The Fourth to Eighth Class County Assessment Law, as amended (72 P. S. 5453. 101) creates a "Board of Assessment Appeals" to be composed of the three county t SALARY MINUTE BOOK � BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS -1 commissioners in each county. The. section goes on to provide: "... the county commissioners may appoint' a. board consisting of three members to serve for terms which shall expire concurrently with the terms of the county commissioners making the appointment. No more than two such appointed members shall be members o:' the same political party. " It is the opinion that §301 requires, alternatively, either (a) that the three appointees be unanimously agreed upon by all three Commissioners, or (b) that the minority commissioner can name his own minority appointee to the Board. My reasons in support of this opinion are: (1) The section gives the power of appointment to"the county commissioners" - not to a majority of the county commissioners. (2) The basic Board membership is•the county commissioners them- selves. The appointees are merely the surrogate for the county commissioners. The Board members should, therefore, identify closely as possible with the three individual count commissioners. (3) If the majority commissioners, by outvoting the minority commissioner, can appoint that member of the Board who, by statute, is required to represent the minority political party, the statutory requirement of minority representation on the Board would be subverted. mmm Much criticism has been directed toward the procedures followed by the former Board. Many appealing taxpayers felt that they ha.d received unfair treatment from a Board which performed more as "prosecutor" than as an administrative appeal board. i , Fairness and Justice would be furthered if the new Board were re- quired to follow certain requirements of procedural due process. Such requirements should include: examination. (1) Making a record of appeal hearings. (2) giving to both the county and the taxpayers the right of,cross- (3) Requiring the Board to explain in writing its decision Edward M. Paluso Minority Republican Commissioner Washington County WASHINGTON CO. PRISON: Moved by Mr. Elish, seconded by Mr. Jones, that the following extra payroll for regular salaried employees at the Washington Co. Prison be approved for payment: Name: Hourly Rate: Total Hours: Total Amt. Alverta Denson, $2. 10 8 $16. 80 Assistant Matron Remarks: Mr. Paluso: You're not just indiscriminately adding money to the payroll. She was used to escort a female Yablonski prisoner, is that right? Mr. Murphy: Extra help. That's the way he has it stated mere. Mr. Flynn: This came from Warden Roupe. She is on extra there as an Assistant Matron. 56 SALARYMINUTE. B o o,K BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS Roll call vote taken: F Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr,, Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr., Flynn - Yes. Motion carded unanimously.- ; TAX ASSESSMENT OFFICE: Moved by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Elish, that the following employees be removed from temporary status (at $136. 50 bi-weekly) in the Tax Assessment Office and placed on the payroll as permanent employees (at $143. 50 bi-weekly): effective January 24, 1972 Violet S.cariot Genevieve Morris _ Kathy Bell Roll call vote taken: Mr.f Jones -.Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. BUILDING MAINTENANCE Moved by Mr. Jones; seconded by Mr. Elish, that Frank Pucci, employee in the Recorder of Deeds Office (Account #113) be transferred to the Carpenter Shop (Main- tenance - Account #103) effective January 24, 1972, at $174. 50 bi-weekly. Remarks: Mr. Paluso: Is there an opening in the Carpenter's Shop. Mr. Flynn: Yes theme is. , Mr. Paluso: And this means there will be one less employee in the Recorder of Deeds Office Mr. Flynn: Yes. Mr. Paluso: :Is that position to be filled? Mr, Flynn: I have no idea. It's up to the Recorder of Deeds Mr. Paluso: Is this man presently gainfully employed? Mr. Flynn: I can't answer that. Mr. Jones: Evidently he is. He is working for the Recorder of Deeds. Mr. Flynn: Other than his present employment? I can't answer that. Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. rl u 1 SALARY MINUTE B o ❑ K BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS CHILD WELFARE SERVICES: Moved by Mr. Elish, seconded by Mr. Jones, that Elena Bell, Clerk - Typist I for Child Welfare Services be granted an increment from an annual salary of $5007 to an annual salary of $5268, effective February 21, 1972. THs. is based on her Performance Evaluation Report. Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. WASHINGTON CO. HOME & HOSPITAL: Moved by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Elish, that the salaries of the following employees of the Washington Co. Home & Hospital be set as indicated: Name: Salary: Effective Date: Sophiann C Closser, Registered $300. 00 bi-weekly January 12, 1972 Nurse (On January 14, 1972 Mrs. Closser was transferred to a permanent position at the Washington County Home for Aged Women at the same salary) Dolores V Laabs, Registered Nurse on part-time basis $30. 00 per day January 13, 1972 Mildred L. Scott, Registered Nurse $300. 00 bi-weekly January 17, ' 1972 Roll call vote taken: Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elfish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. PROTHONOTARY'S OFFICE: Moved by Mr. Elish, seconded by Mr. Jones, that the salary of Linda L Beagle, Clerk in the Prothonotary's Office (permanent) be set at $143. 50 bi-weekly, effective January 24, 1972. Roll call vote taken: Mr, Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; ' Mr. Elish - Yes; Mr. Flynn - Yes. Motion carried unanimously. TREASURER'S OFFICE: Moved by Mr. Morgan, seconded by Mr. -Pa,luso, that the salaries of Helen Minor, Cashier and Bookkeeper and Helene Oberst, Cashier in the Treasurer's Office be increased from $150. 50 bi-weekly to $174. 50 bi-weekly, effective January 24, 19T2, ~58 SALARY �MINUTE, B0QK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASMINGTON" COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN, JOHN P. BEVEC, .JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS subject to the approval of the Pay Board. Remarks: - Mr. Jones: Is there money in your budget for this increment? Mr. Morgan: You mean purely established as salaries for clerks? Mr, Jones: Yes. Mr, Morgan: No, there was no increases for any employees in my office and there still isn't. In the final analysis, if everyone, stayed on at the present time, we would still be short in that particular category, with no increases. Now, on these two employees --this is the third time I have been in here for them. They are presently six increments behind women who are doing exactly the same work with the exact same amount of responsibility. People doing the same work are making a hundred dollars more a month than what these two are. It's onlyfair to them that you -bring them to at least this amount because they are carrying out their duties and they assume every responsibility in handling a considerable amount of money. Mr. Jones: For my own information, was this Helene Oberst a, temporary employee? Mr. Morgan: Well for some time - yes. I ha.d a woman who had been injured in a wreck (Mrs. Smogy) and she was on sick leave and she indicated she was going to retire. So I made arrangements to put Mrs. Oberst on at that time as extra help, because I ,knew that I had a retirement facing me and. I had need for extra people. At that time that was the reason for her being carried on for some time as extra help. Mr. Flynn: May I say I have done a little -.research on this also and as Chairman of this Board and knowing that we granted an increase which averages out to 5. 5% (overall increase) effective as of the first pay period of this year. I was prepared to rule you out of order, Sir, because you asked for a 15% increase in addition to the 5%.already granted. You are asking for about 3 increments which amounts to about 15%. Mr. Morgan: Well, I don't think that any of us here as elected officials can look at4some employee with a, small raise, when by law we have all had a very substantial increase from what out original salary was. I don't really think that's a very valid argument. We have people who are serving in a responsible position, handling thousands of dollars for the county. Mr. Paluso: If they remember, about an hour, ago we granted a two increment raise for a one year period. Now, how long have these people been employed? Mr. Morgan: One has been with me since 1968. She is one increment above the starting C C �1 1 SALARY MINUTE BOOK ItJA9 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL R. FLYNN. JOHN P. BEVEC. JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS salary. The other has been a permanent employee since the latter part of 1970. Mr. Paluso: One has been there for four years and one three and you are asking for a three increment raise, where we just awarded a two increment raise for a year? Mr. Flynn: We two (Mr. Flynn and Mr. Jones) voted against it. You're saying that the majority of the board voted for it, subject to the approval of the Pay Board. What I'm going to say to you too Sir, that I as Chairman, knowing full well the implications here, must definitely have approval, Mr. Morgan, contrary to you thinkings. SHERIFF'S OFFICE: Roll call vote taken: Mr. Morgan - Yes; Mr. Jones - Yes; Mr. Paluso - Yes; Mr. Elish -- Yes; Mr. Flynn - No. Motion carried. Moved by Mr. Debreczeni, seconded by Mr. Flynn, that the salary of Michael A Hanna, Solicitor -Deputy Sheriff in the Sheriff's Office be- set at $257. 50 bi- weekly, effective February 1, 1972. R emarks : Mr. Hormell stated that this matter was called to his attention by Mr. Murphy, who asked about an opinion handed down by Judge Carson regarding the possibility of conflict of interests between the position of solicitor and clerk. Mr. Hormell stated that he has not been able to find a case decided on by Judge Carson on the specific subject. However, he referred to Walker's Appeal and the Appeal of Faust. There is no outright prohibition of this combination of jobs. The word clerk must be given its usual meaning (as someone engaged in clerical work. ) It is up to the County Controller to check on whether or not he is performing these duties of clerk. Mr. Debreczeni stated that he would like to appoint Mr. Hanna Solicitor -Deputy Sheriff in charge of all criminal division work due to the fact that he has had great experience as District Attorney for the County. Mr. Hormell made note you cannot accept an application for a. deputy sheriff until he has filed the pre- liminary information for a ten day period. Remarks: Mr. Paluso: I have already gone on record as to opposing the multiplicity of solicitors in the county row offices, and the boards and commissions and so forth. Also, I have been in favor of a. consolidated legal department to handle all of the routine functionary duties. There are very few duties for solicitors of the offices with the exception of the two mandated by law. I would like to further state on the record, that I'm in favor of these two mandated