OCR Text |
Show County attorney to receive 42 percent raise for services Bv SCOTT SUMMERILL FARMINGTON The Davis County Commission passed an ordinance or-dinance to increase the wages of elected official by 6.5 percent, and give the position of county attorney the option of being a full-time, service ser-vice exclusive office with a 42-percent 42-percent pay raise. Under the new ordinance, anyone running for county attorney would declare whether they were running as part-time or full-time when filing for the office. Under part-time status, the official offi-cial would collect $44,000 per year for services as county attorney. In addition, they would be allowed to maintain a private law practice to subsidize their income as long as it did not interfere with their duties as county attorney. As a full-time county attorney, the annual wage would be $62,500. And, with exception of such cases that are not classified as criminal, such as divorce, adoption and probate pro-bate cases, the official would be designated to work exclusively as county attorney and not handle private criminal cases. They would also be required to be available to the county on a full-time basis (part-time is only required under statute to be in the office one day per month). The case exceptions to exclusive service raised the concern of Commissioner Com-missioner William Lawrence who argued that the attorney should not be allowed to practice in any way in the private sector. "You've been very careful to leave yourself a loophole," he said to County Attorney Mel Wilson."If you're going to be full-time, you've got to eliminate these exceptions." Lawrence also questioned the timing of the proposal, pointing out that Wilson is running unopposed in the upcoming county attorney race. And, had the ordinance been in place before the filing deadline, other attorneys may have been enticed en-ticed by the higher wages to file for the office. In addition, Lawrence said the recent hiring of another attorney in the department, which brings the legal staff to nine, is more than adequate ade-quate to handle the case load of the office. "Of all the elected officials, yours is probably the most undeserving undeser-ving (of a pay increase), ' ' Lawrence said to Wilson. "There are a lot of people out there that would jump at the chance to make $40,000 a year." Commission Chairman Gayle Stevenson called Lawrence's statements "ridiculous" and said the wording of the ordinance allowing allow-ing limited involvement with private cases is identical to the job description of every attorney working work-ing in the county office. During a public hearing on the ordinance, Chief Deputy Attorney of Criminal Justice Carvel Harward said the exclusive service proposal is the best way to ensure continued, justifiable progress in the office. ' If you were to purchase his services ser-vices m the market it would cost a lot more than $63,000," he said. "This wouldn't mean we're paying t - him more for what he's doing. We're just paying a fair price for his time." Craig Howe, vice president of the Davis County Employees Association, Associa-tion, said people should not have to make financial sacrifices in order to be public officials. Layton City Attorney Mark Arnold Ar-nold said it's time for Davis County to get in line with other counties across the nation and support the full-time exclusive service ordinance. or-dinance. "It's politically sound, financially finan-cially responsible and professionally professional-ly smart," he said. "Having his services exclusive and under your control is very important in that office." of-fice." Wilson said the county attorney needs to be involved with criminal I h prosecution on a full-time basis in order to effectively run the office. "I feel the time has come in Davis County when the county attorney at-torney can't occupy an office where he supervises 20 people and prosecutes pros-ecutes criminals and still hold a private practice," Wilson said. "I feel very strongly that the county attorney at-torney should be involved in prosecuting pros-ecuting cases on a day-to-day basis." Clearfield City Attorney Larry Wagner also voiced his support of the exclusive service proposal. In addition to the exclusive service ser-vice clause, the ordinance also gives the 12 elected officials in the county a 6.5 percent raise effective July 1, 1990. The raise will bring the offi- SEE RAISE PG. A-2 ft Raise CONT. FROM A-1 cials up to parity with officials in surrounding counties, according to Wilson. ki;:hi now we're substantially behind," he said, pointing out there have been no salary increases for elected officials since 1987. Another provision of the or- dinance will prevent the need for such an exorbitant increase in the fut ure , according to Wilson, by allowing elected officials to receive the same raises for cost of living and salary increases as county employees. Under the present policy, the commission reviews employee wages and grants appropriate increases in-creases annually. However, elected officials' wages are not included in the yearly evaluation. As a result, their salary increases must be handled separately and usually less often, making increases seem extravagant, according to officials. The new ordinance will give elected officials the same wage adjustments ad-justments as employees receive each year. "As elected officials we need to be concerned with salaries and how they relate to employees," Wilson said. "This is one way to address the salary increases of officials on a yearly basis." Layton resident Glen Hunt expressed ex-pressed concern that the move could prompt commissioners to approve ap-prove inflated wage hikes to employees if the increase would apply to their salaries as well. Lawrence said the wage of elected officials should be set at the time of filing and remain for the entire en-tire term of the office, which has been set by state officials at four years. "I knew what the wage was when I paid my filing fee," he said. "I don't think it's right that I give myself a raise just because I have the authority." Stevenson said four years without a wage adjustment is inappropriate. inap-propriate. He also referred to the exorbitant size of an increase if it were left the same for four years. "Yearly increases would be a rational way of dealing with the cost of living and other concerns," he said. '( Commissioner Lawrence) seems to have a personal fear that someone will abuse something. We need to be above that kind of pettiness." When the vote was called, the ordinance or-dinance passed with Commissioners Commis-sioners Stevenson and William Peters voting for, and Commissioner Commis-sioner Lawrence voting against. |