Prosecutor’s office examined by federal agency
Lou Marzeles
Editor
Lori Hoctor, a candidate for the office of Klickitat County Prosecuting Attorney, says she was fired as a deputy prosecutor for saying that she intended to run for office in this year’s election. Current Prosecuting Attorney Tim O’Neill says the real reason for her dismissal was the potential for adverse impact on office productivity by her candidacy. Now a federal agency is involved and is determining whether or not federal law has been violated.
The U. S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is the federal agency charged with enforcement of the Hatch Act, and the agency is currently examining events in the Prosecuting Attorney’s office to determine whether or not actions there are in violation of the Act. Another deputy prosecuting attorney and candidate for the position of Prosecuting Attorney, Dave Brown, approached the agency about the matter after concluding that it probably fell under the Hatch Act. Meanwhile, Brown is still employed in the Prosecuting Attorney’s office while Hoctor is not.
The Hatch Act is a piece of federal legislation enacted during the New Deal years of Franklin Roosevelt that, among other things, prohibits federal employees from exerting untoward influence on the political process. In addition to federal employees, it also covers state and/or county employees if their positions are paid for, in any part, by federal money. In Klickitat County, both Hoctor’s and Brown’s positions were/are paid for in part with federal funds, which is what raises the issue of whether or not their situations are covered by the Hatch Act. An opinion on the matter by the OSC is expected imminently.
Hoctor says that she was fired—technically, her appointment as a deputy prosecuting attorney was withdrawn—because she told O’Neill she intended to run against Craig Juris, another candidate and also an employee in the same office, this year for Prosecuting Attorney. “Tim came to me and said, ‘Lori, I’ve heard you intend to run,’” Hoctor says. “I told him, ‘I can’t discuss this in the office.’ Tim said, ‘That’s fine.’ Then Friday [January 15, 2010] Tim walked me down to Human Resources and told me, ‘You’ve done a wonderful job, but I can’t have you running against Craig.’ Randi Post, the personnel manager, was there, and there are others who can corroborate this,” Hoctor says.
“Dave Brown is also running for the same position,” Hoctor adds. “There were three males in the office running for that position. I’m the only one who was fired.”
Hoctor claims O’Neill’s dismissal of her was for political reasons and therefore constitutes violation of the Hatch Act. “He could have said, ‘I don’t like her shoes,’” Hoctor says. “But you can’t say, ‘I fire her because she’s gay,’ or ‘She’s a woman’—and you’re going to run into the same problem if she’s running for election.”
“I know why I released her from her position,” O’Neill says. “And that’s not the reason. I know how elections can affect an office. I know how it can affect productivity. And I have complete discretion to withdraw an appointment at any time, for any reason.” O’Neill says Hoctor’s appointment was withdrawn solely because he felt Hoctor’s candidacy would adversely affect the office’s morale and productivity.
“I withdrew her appointment as deputy prosecuting attorney the morning of January 15,” O’Neill says. “She was put on administrative leave January 19, and that was done for the purposes of her getting additional benefits at her discharge. Immediately afterward, she held a meeting in which she said she had already consulted an attorney and was going to sue the county. She said that to me and to Randi Post.”
Hoctor denies any intention of suing the county, now or in the future. “That would only hurt the county,” she says. But her situation raises the question: why was she the only one of the candidates released?
“I considered the possibility that the Hatch Act might be involved here,” says Brown. “I did some research and I spoke with an employment attorney, and my conclusion was, yes, the Hatch Act probably does apply here.” Brown says he then contacted the OSC about the situation and was told that he would have to have his supervisor contact the OSC in order for the agency to look into the matter. Brown went to O’Neill with this information, and O’Neill then contacted the OSC, which began examining the situation. While awaiting the OSC’s opinion, O’Neill says, he chose not to take action regarding Brown’s candidacy. “Dave may be a morale issue,” O’Neill says, “but I’m waiting for the Hatch Act investigation to come back.”
O’Neill says he’s the only one of the 39 elected prosecuting attorneys in the state of Washington to voluntarily contact the Office of Special Counsel asking about the Hatch Act. In a press release, O’Neill states, “If there is an adverse finding [from the OSC], I will decide whether to appeal the decision or withdraw deputy appointments subject to this Act if they choose not to resign. Their departure would result in only two prosecutors left to prosecute criminal cases in the Superior, Juvenile and District Courts, handle civil matters, and respond to coroner calls.”
His release also reasserts that Hoctor was not fired for announcing her candidacy.
“Candidate Lori Hoctor was not terminated from this office for reasons of the Hatch Act,” he states. “There was no request to the Office of Special Counsel for an opinion during that time. This issue was raised recently, several months after Ms. Hoctor’s departure. The decision to withdraw Ms. Hoctor’s appointment was made by me based on expected detrimental effects on work productivity and office morale, nothing more.”
O’Neill says he’s surprised by rampant rumors that the Department of Justice has people walking around his office. “There is currently no Department of Justice investigation,” he says in his release. “Enforcement of the Hatch Act is left to the Office of Special Counsel, which is independent from the Department of Justice. No person spreading this rumor has discussed this matter with me. Their reasons for circulating this rumor can only be assumed, an action I will not take.”
Hoctor says she has been in ongoing contact with an OSC representative named Megan Hamilton, and her recollection is that Hamilton told her she was from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Special Counsel. The Justice Department web site does show an Office of Special Counsel listed under it, though the OSC web site is a totally different URL and has a statement on it that it is a completely separate and independent federal agency. Calls to Hamilton and to the OSC press office were not returned as of press time for this article.
Brown says that if the OSC’s opinion is that the Hatch Act does indeed apply in this situation, he is prepared to step down as a county employee in order to run for office. O’Neill says that his deputies still employed and who are running for office—Juris and Brown—would both have to resign if it’s determined that the Hatch Act covers them. “That’s why we’re facing the potential loss of two prosecuting attorneys,” he says. “If it does apply, they [the OSC] will give us 30 days after their decision to appeal, and/or this department will be penalized twice their annual salary by the Office of Special Counsel. Let’s say their salaries were $120,000. We’d be looking at $240,000, which is a big chunk of my budget.”
Hoctor asserts that the situation remains unacceptable. “Tim campaigns from the office at lunch [for Juris]—there are paid-for lunches that all the staff goes to. Free Mexican lunches from Ayutla’s. We sat around the tables at lunch and were told they’re running Craig. It’s very important to him that Craig stays on.”
O’Neill remains mystified by how the matter is being discussed in some quarters of the county. Goldendale City Council member Mike Montanye is among those who have raised a critical voice against Hoctor’s firing and its Hatch Act ramifications. “It’s illegal, what happened to her," Montanye says. O’Neill says he wonders why Montanye hasn’t come and talked with him about the matter. “The people talking about it don’t raise it with me,” O’Neill says. “You would think if people have problems with the termination of Ms. Hoctor, they’d come to me about it. But no one has.”
What does the Hatch Act say?
The Hatch Act was enacted initially in 1939. It is intended to cover all civilian employees in the executive branch of the federal government except the president and vice president. It applies as well to governmental agency employees at state and lower levels of government when their salaries are paid in part by federal money. The law applies only to employees, not to elected officials.
On the Office of Special Counsel web site is a document that provides a cursory overview of what kinds of activities are permitted and which are not under the Hatch Act. The document is called “Permitted and Prohibited Activities for Employees Who May Engage in Partisan Activity.”
In part, it indicates that employees may:
• Be candidates for public office in nonpartisan elections.
• Express opinions about candidates and issues.
• Contribute money to political organizations.
• Attend and be active at political meetings.
• Campaign for or against candidates in partisan elections.
It also says that employees may not:
• Use their official authority or influence to interfere with an election.
• Engage in political activity in any government office.
• Be candidates for public office in partisan elections.
• Wear political buttons on duty.
Among the critical issues involved in the situation in the Klickitat County Prosecuting Attorney’s office are what activities were conducted by the Prosecuting Attorney—who is an elected official and, according to interpretation by some, by definition not covered by the Hatch Act—and which of the pertinent activities were conducted or are being conducted by employees in the office who fall under the Act’s provisions.
City council grants KVH extension
Lou Marzeles
Editor
The Goldendale City Council meeting Monday night resulted in granting an extension to Klickitat Valley Health (KVH) for an extension on its rezoning and consideration of a request for a permit to keep a pet capybara, among other matters.
The meeting began with a report from Police Chief Rick Johnson, who said that the ABATE event last weekend was not very well attended. “We had no issues at all with ABATE,” he said. “I’m not sure why it wasn’t very well attended, though some said they didn’t really get the word out this year.” Johnson also reported that last weekend’s Active Shooter training program went well. “Officers really got to know the courthouse building,” Johnson said. He also reported that while the week overall was relatively quiet in regard to crime in the city, graffiti is once again showing up around town. “The person we arrested for that last time is back out,” Johnson said. “We’re keeping an eye on that.”
The Goldendale Lions Club was granted permission to sell fireworks again this year, provided that the city is listed as an additional insured on the club’s fireworks insurance policy. The club will sell its fireworks only at the IGA Market.
Jim Link appeared before the council to request a lifetime exemption from park fees to use Ekone Park for his annual horseshoe tournaments. “I’ve put a lot of my own time and money into creating the horseshoe pits in the park,” Link said, “and bringing tournaments to Goldendale. I’m about to turn 75. I think it’s fair to have a lifetime exemption on park fees for the tournaments.” Council members questioned Link about whether or not he expected his tournament heirs to receive the same consideration, and he answered he did not. His request was passed by the council contingent on all fees for camping and RVs being collected.
An exotic pet request followed. Ryan Lenoir appeared to present his case for a permit to keep a capybara, a mammal indigenous to South America that is the largest rodent in the world, reaching between 75 to 150 pounds. After considerable questioning and discussion, Lenoir withdrew his request upon discovering at the meeting that the state would not permit him to walk his animal around town; it would have to be kept solely on his property.
A representative from KVH appeared before the council to request an extension of its deadline for its rezoning conditions. The rezoning has to do with the hospital’s construction of improvements in its parking lot. An extension of 180 days was approved by the council.
In other matters, the city approved a new fee agreement with the firm Menke Jackson Beyer Ehlis & Harper LLP, establishing lower rates for the firm’s associates. It also authorized the mayor to execute a property lease agreement between the city and the Greater Goldendale Chamber of Commerce for the Chamber’s office at Vern Markee Park through June 2013. The city also completed termination of an interlocal agreement transferring all ownership of the covered swimming pool to the Central Klickitat County Parks & Recreation District. |
