43
UPDATE | Sciortino OK'd raises, bonuses; Meacham fires McFall
UPDATE:
YOUNGSTOWN — On his second day in office, new Mahoning County Auditor Ralph T. Meacham fired his chief deputy auditor for failing to fully disclose to him the compensation increases provided by now-suspended Auditor Michael V. Sciortino to certain office employees.
Meacham said he fired Carol McFall this afternoon for failing to disclose $28,110 in Sciortino-approved bonuses paid to 13 employees.
That amount was in addition to $21,703 in raises Sciortino approved in his final days in office for an overlapping group of 13 employees.
Meacham said McFall’s partial disclosure did not meet his standards of transparency.
McFall, who served at the pleasure of the elected auditor, had been with the county since August 2005.
YOUNGSTOWN
In the waning days of his administration as Mahoning County auditor, Michael V. Sciortino individually granted pay increases ranging from 1.13 percent to 12.53 percent to 13 of his 43 employees totaling $21,702.63.
Some were effective Feb. 23 — the day Sciortino was suspended from office by a three-judge panel — and some had unspecified effective dates.
Sciortino signed the forms granting the raises on various dates this year, with the most-recent signatures having been dated Feb. 20, designating some raises as merit increases and others as compensation for expanded duties.
The largest increase went to Thomas Lyden, who manages the county payroll department.
His raise was the only one listed as a promotion, but the form granting his raise and showing his old and new titles was not among the documents in a packet provided to The Vindicator by the auditor’s office.
Lyden’s salary rose $7,070 — from $56,430 to $63,500 a year.
Two of those who got raises already were earning more than the elected auditor’s $89,109 annual salary even before they got their increases: Carol McFall, chief deputy auditor, who got a 1.55 percent raise from $91,084 to $92,500; and Jacob Williams, information-technology director, who got a 2.25 percent raise from $90,464 to $92,500.
Janet Szenborn, president of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Union Local 2533, said she considers the pay raises given to union members Cathy Lewis, Rochelle Bahny and Brian Wright to be a violation of the union contract, which she said forbids selective raises for individual union members beyond the pay level the contract specifies for their positions.
The new auditor, Ralph T. Meacham, who took over Tuesday for Sciortino, said he had not decided what to do about the raises.
“This is a problem, and we have to find out what happened and how it happened, and we don’t want to violate any union contracts,” he said. “We’re going to work together with the union to find a resolution.”
“This was a breach” of county officials’ expressed position in budget hearings that the county doesn’t have money for pay raises, Meacham said of the increases. Some nonunion employees of the auditor’s office got no pay increases at all this year, he said.
“It is a mess,” Meacham said of the granting of the pay raises.
Meacham said, however, it doesn’t bother him that McFall and Williams earn more than he does.
“I’m new here. They’ve been here a long time,” he said. Williams joined the county in December 2004, and McFall in August 2005.
“We’ve got to figure out what the [basis] of these increases [is], if any,” said county Prosecutor Paul J. Gains, who is advising Meacham.
Whether the raises can legally be rescinded depends on whether the affected employee is classified as a civil-service worker, a union member under contract or an at-will employee of the auditor, he said.
“It’s going to take a little while for us to figure this out,” he said.
“I don’t like the fact that this was done so secretly,” Gains said. Whether to grant raises should have been Meacham’s prerogative, he said.
“It’s something that is kind of troublesome. ... It’s something we need to look at,” Anthony Traficanti, chairman of the county commissioners, said of the selective pay raises for the 13 designated individuals.
“He [Sciortino] had the power and authority to do that. ... The question is: Was it in his budget?” he said of the money needed for the pay raises.
Sciortino could not be reached for comment.
Also approved in the waning days of the Sciortino administration was a three-year labor contract for all Local 2533 members, retroactive to July 2, 2014.
The contract covering 22 workers calls for cost-of-living supplements of $1,200 each in January 2015 and January 2016 for full-time workers, followed by a 2.5 percent pay raise for all union workers in January 2017. Union members earn between $33,858 and $64,749 annually.
The contract was ratified Jan. 9 by the union membership, and it took effect automatically because the county commissioners did not vote on it during the 30 days after Jan. 12, when the contract was submitted to the commissioners.
In departments headed by independently elected officeholders, the county commissioners have jurisdiction only over union contracts, not over the salaries of nonunion workers, Traficanti said.
In the past, commissioners have allowed union contracts to take effect without voting on them in public meetings in cases where not much caught their attention or where they didn’t see anything they disagreed with, he said, declining to comment further.
“Each department head is responsible for their own department” when it comes to salaries of nonunion workers in departments headed by independently elected county officials, said Commissioner David Ditzler.
As for the auditor’s union contract, he said: “It’s a paperwork formality. We negotiate no contracts. ... That’s why there’s no vote required by us.”
Ditzler said he doesn’t remember any votes on union contract ratifications having been taken in public meetings by the commissioners since he took office in January 2013.
Although they didn’t take a formal vote on it in a public meeting, all three county commissioners signed a form dated Feb. 26 saying Local 2533’s contract “is deemed approved.”
Also in the contract is the option for employees to work four 10-hour days a week with the elected auditor’s permission.
Meacham said he hasn’t decided whether to allow the four-day weeks.
“The function of the auditor’s office is to service the public and the taxpayers. I would only approve this if I am absolutely convinced that we could service the taxpayers of the county” properly using the four-day week option, he explained.
Szenborn said she favors the four-day week option with 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. hours because some of the office’s work is best done before and after regular public business hours of 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.