Council at odds over attorney's pay

The Post and Courier
Wednesday, December 26, 2007


Charleston County Attorney Joe Dawson's nine bosses have decided to restrain his pay after a heated discussion that was fueled by appeals for fiscal responsibility and accusations of foul play.

Dawson's pay had been a sore subject among County Council members for quite awhile; and although they took action last week, the council still remains at odds on whether his position should continue being contracted out or whether the county attorney should be employed full time with a flat salary.

Councilwoman Colleen Condon, who thinks the county attorney should be a full-time position, said, "For many members on council, it's an accountability issue. ... I'm pleased with his work, and I think most folks are."

Dawson is one of four staff members hired directly by council. He acts as the county's chief attorney and is paid an hourly rate of $125, plus fringe benefits, a retainer of about $30,000 and payments for counsel when the county issues bonds. He can take on outside cases in addition to his county work.

Last year, Dawson billed the county $305,765, and his total compensation for this year is expected to mirror that amount.

Some council members think that's too much for someone employed by the county.

County Council voted Dec. 18 to cap Dawson's salary at $172,500 plus fringe benefits and any bond counsel, no matter how many hours he works. The council also extended his contract for three years.

Councilman Dickie Schweers said they took a major step in the right direction but that the issue warrants further thought.

"We got a lot closer to where we need to be," he said about the pay cap. "I'm still distraught that at least four of our council members supported doing nothing. And that nothing ... meant we were going to continue paying our county attorney a third, or in excess of a third of a million dollars."

But Charleston County Councilman Teddie Pryor argued Dawson's pay has been in line with the rest of the state for those counties that contract out legal services, considering his office's litigation case load of more than 5,000 lawsuits.

"Look at the kind of services we're getting," Pryor said.

Pryor also said the county saved money by having Dawson handle most of its legal work because the county is reimbursed each year from the state insurance reserve fund for out-of-pocket expenses associated with contracting legal services.

Last year, the county received more than $77,000 for Dawson's work alone. That means he actually cost the county about $230,000 last year, once the reimbursement is subtracted from his overall bill.

It is difficult to compare Dawson's salary with other counties statewide because counties have varied pay structures and caseloads, but he would arguably remain among the highest-paid county attorney in the state, even with his substantial pay cut, a pay scale report provided by the South Carolina Association of Counties shows.

The association reported that Greenville County pays its attorney $141,795, which is the most paid to any county attorney statewide who is employed full time.

Greenville County Attorney Mark Tollison said his county has had its main attorney work in-house for at least the past 20 years.

Tollison said Friday that his office does some litigation but that he hires outside counsel to try cases most of the time. He was unsure about how much they paid last year for hired help.

Berkeley County pays its full-time attorney between $70,567 and $127,308, according to the association.

Deputy Supervisor Chip Boling said Berkeley currently employs a county attorney and a paralegal and that the pay structure works well for them.

But the association's data shows more counties statewide contract with their attorneys instead of employing them full-time.

For example, Dorchester County contracts out its legal work and is budgeted to spend no more than $89,290 next year, which includes a retainer and hourly rate of $150 for the chief attorney and any additional counsel he seeks, County Administrator Jason Ward said.

"If we do not use him, he does not get paid," Ward said, and that they have had that pay structure for the past 15 years.

Dawson's capped base salary of $172,500 would differ greatly from what he makes now.

Will he take the new deal? That remains unclear because Dawson declined to comment for this story. His policy is not to talk to the media.

BY TENISHA WALDOReach Tenisha Waldo at 937-5744 or twaldo@postandcourier.com.



Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version   Add this

Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.

Comments

This article has  3 comment(s)

Posted by bluecap on December 26, 2007 at 5:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

5,000 lawsuits? Do the math. $230,000 divided by $125 gives 1840 hours worked by Dawson. So he averages 22 minutes per lawsuit. Folks, you can't speedread a lawsuit in 22 minutes!
Once again Colleen Condon proves to be the dumbest of a pretty obtuse bunch. Her only saving grace is that her opponent in the election was perhaps the biggest jackass ever to run for Council.



Posted by eyfigueroa on December 26, 2007 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

i don't see what the problem is. revamp the job description, give Mr. Dawson first opportunity to accept position if he declines open it up to open hire.

case closed.

i for know of more important issues to be discussing.



Posted by lantanagurl on December 26, 2007 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Enough already. Quit blowing my hard earned money on this immediately! I can hardly wait for the vote again so we can get rid of these yahoo's who don't know how to be fiscally responsible with our tax dollars.




Sponsored Links