You are viewing the archives of the old northcoastoregon.com. Please visit the new North Coast Oregon at: http://www.northcoastoregon.com/

The "cut" to the DA's salary ...

by Walter Richards

First off, if the DA is a state employee … it makes sense that he is paid by the state.

Secondly, if the county is going to pay him a supplemental salary … there should be an employment contract in place. Otherwise, you wind up with just the sort of situation we have now.

Third, if you think the DA deserves more pay than the state (his employer) is paying … take it up with the state. They have plenty of money for all sorts of “feel good” projects, but can’t seem to come up with funds for public safety or education. Perhaps when Oregonians stop electing the same “feel good” legislatures/governors time and again, a solution will present itself. Until then, you have only yourself to blame.

Last, but not least, let’s talk about ulterior motives. There’s a few of them being bandied about. However, I think if there’s any ulterior motive, it would be this … the lack of timber funds coming in to the county. Both the state and federal governments have just about killed the fishing and logging industries in this county. So it would only be natural for the county to stop paying whatever funds it could to state/federal programs/agencies. And it just so happens that the DA’s “supplemental salary” is one of those that it can easily cut from the budget without retaliation from “big brother”.

Click stars to rate this article. Rated 5 out of five stars.
This article has been rated 1 time.

15 comments on this article (post your own)

1 On May 20, 04:57 pm, Josh wrote:

For Josh’s version go to CoastDA.com

2 On May 21, 07:36 am, Walter Richards wrote:

Josh –

Are you a state employee or not?

Did you have an employment contract with the county?

3 On May 21, 09:27 am, Josh wrote:

Yes, I am a state employee and according to the county not a county employee in any way (a 2005 county legal opinion).

The county is under no legal obligation to pay me anything although ORS 8.830 says that “wenever, in the judgment of any….county commissioners, the salaries paid to the district attorneys, or to any deputy dsitrict attorney, are not commensurate with the character of the service performed, the board of commissioners may pay out of the funds of the county such additional amounts as will properly compensate said officers for the service performed.”

Note that Oregon law refers to the state pay of “deputy DAs” as well. This reflects the historical anachronism that existed when the state paid most or all of the salaries of ALL the prosecutors in the D.A.’s office. They now pay only the base salary and benefits and nothing else.

I am not “employed” by the county in any way and therefore I don’t have contract. In fact under Oregon law it is illegal for me to contract to do any legal work except as the District Attorney.

4 On May 21, 09:49 am, The Guy Who Writes This wrote:

Then you should not be getting paid by them. However, you say you are a department manager, perhaps you should tell the County you will no longer manage that department.

5 On May 21, 10:49 am, Walter Richards wrote:

Sounds to me like ORS 8.830 is nothing more than the state trying to shirk its responsibilities. IE: “We don’t have to pay them a competitive salary, because the counties will chip in when we don’t.” In other words, the state purposefully doesn’t pay you what you’re worth, hoping that the county will pick up the rest of the bill – while forbidding you from entering into a contract with the county for those payments, so they (county) can quit those payments at their discretion.

I understand your frustration, Josh. Nobody likes to see their salary decrease. But as I’ve said, it seems the real root of the problem is with the state as your employer … not with the county deciding to end its “charity”.

6 On May 29, 12:12 am, anon wrote:

The letter from the Lighthouse director published in Monday’s Daily Astorian should be treated as a total hoax. The Daily Astorian completely showed its incapacity to be unbiased in this, as in most other matters, by not revealing to the public that Joshua Marquis was a founding board member of Lighthouse for Kids Child Abuse Assessment Center. The executive director, Diana Smith, would not have a job there if it were not for Josh Marquis so for her to write a letter of support without that disclaimer is negligent on her behalf as well as the paper’s.

We can trust the radio ads as much as the letters being written by employees of the center he formed. The fact that the executive director and an employee of the center, Diana Smith, is now writing a letter of endorsement for him says little for his integrity, and that he is still spinning the truth making his minions shovel it to us. How forthcoming was that for the director of the Lighthouse to omit that the center was founded by the DA?

7 On May 29, 04:44 am, scott wrote:

Good going “Anon,” you’ve really proved that the DA is evil, going around founding organizations to protect children from child abuse – the nerve of that man! Oh yes, and his evil minions – organization directors, fellow DA’s from other counties, etc… – are all out to help him maintain his position of supreme hegemonic power so that he can keep on creating evil organizations that help kids and crime victims – yeah, that must be it.

I believe those tinfoil beanies must be starting to chafe. Perhaps you should line a room in your home with foil so that you can occasionally remove it, thus allowing better air circulation around the brain.

8 On May 29, 05:06 am, James wrote:

Scott – I dont think (except for a few people) that folks think that the DA is evil. And no one for a second is trying to disparage the work that the social agencies do in this county as you are implying.

I wouldnt characterize the DA as evil.

Manipulative, self-serving and not to be trusted but not evil.

9 On May 29, 06:13 am, scott wrote:

James,

Your response sounds rational and measured, yet you are supporting this person who said that Josh was “spinning the truth” (which suggests that he is lying) and states that those who support him or decry the flawed policy decisions made recently by county commissioners are his “minions.”

My addition of the word “evil” to the previously used word “minions” in my response was merely meant to put in place the word that was implied in the post to which I was responding, and to point out the absurdity of trying to attack Josh by stating that he was being supported by those who work for organizations that he helped to form, and which clearly do a lot of good in this county.

It serves to illustrate how low the DA’s enemies will go to attack him, which seems to be, in my opinion, well below sea level.

10 On May 29, 10:15 am, Carrie wrote:

Enemies? How paranoid can you get? Is Josh Marquis Jeff Hazen’s ENEMY because Josh is telling people to write to the commissioner? Does Josh Marquis wear a tin foil beanie because he says the Commissioners are out to slap him down? When the DA is concerned about his stipend is Josh the wacko?

When the tables are turned he sure knows how to manipulate and paint a different picture doesn’t he, Scott? And this man is the one that is supposed to be protecting ALL of us. ALL of us are supposed to be able to trust him.

People are pissed because he lies and manipulates? You bet! He’s the District Attorney and when he goes in front of a Judge he’s supposed to go with the TRUTH, even if it is limited to as he knows it. When he blatantly lies and manipulates, that is what boils my blood.

He does manipulate. It is a manipulation when you write a letter from an organization that was formed by the very person your advocating for w/o having the courtesy to disclaim that to the public.

You call Walter on this type of thing all of the time, Scott, why do you have a different set of rules for your friends. That the DA would make you change your values serves to illustrate how low one must go to be a friend to the DA.

11 On May 30, 06:45 am, scott wrote:

Concerning paranoia:

“Just because you’re not paranoid doesn’t mean that they’re not out to get you.” – (twentieth century folk saying – unattributed)

“Paranoia is total awareness.” (A friend of mine once had a hat that said this.)

“Paranoia is having all the facts.” – William S. Burroughs

I thank you for the compliment, as I believe a certain amount of paranoia is healthy.

But does one have to be paranoid to look at the out-of-nowhere call for a vote by Mr. Hazen, and the result of that vote, right down to Mr. Lee voting against the cut, to suspect that something is askew?

Could you please elaborate on how you think ”...the tables have turned…?”

Could you please give an example of a blatant lie from Mr. Marquis? If the lies are blatant, they should be easily described here.

12 On May 30, 01:14 pm, No Californification!!! wrote:

“Paranoia is total awareness.” (A friend of mine once had a hat that said this.)

That is a direct quote from another southern Californian by the name of Charles Manson.

Why is Clatsop County becoming focal point for all things Southern Californian? Why do they think we want to be like them? We dont.

13 On May 30, 02:36 pm, Davey Jones wrote:

Ah, yes, the minions grow and attend to the acquiscent herd.

We here in Union Town believe in the days that fight for what you believe is right, I don’t have a problem with Marquis, he has improved business and peope drink without getting DUIs, but then again, why worry if you don’t break the law.

Give the guy his stipend and get on with it! No worries.

What you should worry about is what happens next with county control.

14 On May 30, 08:44 pm, Carrie wrote:

Sure Scott, I have a court transcript in my hands of Josh blatantly lieing to Judge Nelson. I don’t know if I am bringing it out at the commissioners meeting or here. No one seemed to care about it 10 years ago. It really made me wonder when I saw he was on the founding board for the Lighthouse Abuse Assessment Center after this case. And this case did prove to me that he is in it all for the glory of the media or possibility of media. He plays the odds. How many times did Ruth or Mantle go to bat to get their stats?

I think its great that as his neighbor and because you like his wife you write in his defense. You know one side of him. I know another. I know what I know of my own knowledge. I watched and heard him lie and have the transcript. He wasn’t prosecuting anyone I love, like, or admire. He wasn’t not prosecuting someone I thought he should have been. He wasn’t prosecuting, even though he was our DA at the time.

He was lieing to a judge because he was too lazy to look up the facts and he was hoping what he had been told by a junky was true which would give him a case that could make the Wenatchee Sex Scandal pale in comparison. Luckily, Judge Nelson knew different and Marquis was shocked when he was shot down. Luckily for the poor, poor children who could have been hurt by a predator who is now on the county sexual predator list. Marquis is a poor researcher, presents lies as facts, doesn’t do his homework and is always looking at how every case will look in the media.

I know of other cases but they are not ones that I have transcripts for or that I have permission to bring out. I hope they show at the commissioners meeting. I hope that they have the courage. A few have loved ones in prison who were forced to take pleas on things they didn’t do. Marquis little quip, “No one is innocent in prison” doesn’t take a lot of things into account. We have people in prisons who are serving terms for things they didn’t do because of being forced to take plea bargains on threats of harsher counts being thrown at them. No big deal, they’re guilty anyways. No, it means that the people who really committed the crimes that the other ones in prison were forced to claim are still free doing more crimes BUT Marquis’ office’s numbers stack up claiming that they’ve solved crimes when they really have not.

I believe we have elected a board of commissioners to do the hard stuff, hire and fire, listen to concerns, talk with departments, make plans, figure out our budget. If Marquis wasn’t happy he should have been talking with the commissioners. He doesn’t show anywhere where he attempted to talk with the commissioners first before going to the media. Marquis, himself and through his Deputy District Attorneys, retaliates on people who go to the media about a case. Point of fact, one of his deputies lied to a judge and told the judge that she knew for a fact that a defendant wrote to a forum about his own case. I know for a fact that the defendant in question barely knows how to turn a computer on and doesn’t know the difference between a forum, a blog and an email, he did not write about his case anywhere. The Deputy DA’s lie to the judge earned the defendant the Judge’s ire and a warning that the defendant might not receive another court appointed attorney if he continued being so difficult! The defendant was flabbergasted. He wasn’t even allowed to defend himself or talk. Now, in that instance, who would there be to report to? What higher court even wants to hear that? Who even cares? No ONE! And Marquis and his, yes minions, know it. They know they can get away with prejudicing the judge’s and even the defense attorneys, who are going to be representing these indigent “clients,” against them by making these slanderous remarks and whose to stop them? Marquis’ sloppy with “justice”. His work is that of assumptions and when you work that way its going to catch up to you sooner or later.

15 On May 30, 08:57 pm, Carrie wrote:

[But does one have to be paranoid to look at the out-of-nowhere call for a vote by Mr. Hazen, and the result of that vote, right down to Mr. Lee voting against the cut, to suspect that something is askew?]

Out of nowhere? Tryan called it almost a week earlier when he reported on the budget and commented re Marquis’ stipend.

Your taking one sided view of the events. You are not looking at the minutes of the meeting or anyone else’s account. Lee was smart. No matter what he was going to get the flack Cindy would have received sitting in the same chair. Cindy would have expected people to be just. Let’s hope she can be.

The barbs that this is spite for someone going after an incumbents seat is something I have only heard from the people accusing others of doing. I have never heard anyone caring that Cindy ran for a seat against Lee. Most were impressed, if they had a reaction at all.

Post A Comment

(required)

(required but not displayed)



(No HTML, Textile only please. Live comment preview below.)

this is not Spam.

preview

:

Jan 6, 03:57 am


Previous Article:
« Leading medical research among the Amish

Next Article:
The "Calm-a" After the Storm »



NCO Reader Comments


lhjzgbnr txymgjc (The Vote 2006!)
lhjzgbnr txymgjc (The Vote 2006!)
lhjzgbnr txymgjc (The Vote 2006!)
SARA (What to do in Astoria on New Years Eve....)
Alexa Manning (What does the Federal Government Do with our Taxes?)
cnabas (New Tillamook and Clatsop County Blog)
pasgettaorri (The Vote 2006!)
pasgettaorri (The Vote 2006!)
connie (Focus on 49: BOCC work session grapples with difficult legislature)
Delores (Focus on 49: BOCC work session grapples with difficult legislature)
Kristen Molina (North Coast AA Round Up Seaside April 4th 5th 6th 2008)
Madonna Carr (What does the Federal Government Do with our Taxes?)
Wallace Kennedy (More D.A. Talk)
Ollie Woodward (Fort George Brewery Coming Alive)
Augustine Sweet (CCFOG - First report on Lee recall petition signatures)
Glynn Oconnor (A gun show ... without guns ?)
Lorne Riley (notes from Clean Slate PAC meeting 2/13/07)
Clare Ruiz (Durban Group Discusses Carbon Trading and LNG in Astoria)
Stewart Hernandez (Random News For Friday)
Johnna Acosta (Measure 50....Healthy Kids...Cigarette Taxes)

Recent Articles

View All Articles...

Feeds



Home | Archives | Contribute | Back to Top
Take What You Want 2009 NorthCoastOregon.com unless otherwise indicated.
Please email us with any questions or comments.
Site created by Upspring Design.