Sep 3, 2008 By Amy Revak 4 min read

An attempt by Fayette County Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink to seek attorneys interested in serving as the county solicitor ended Tuesday when she didn’t receive a second to the motion. Currently, Joseph E. Ferens Jr. is the county solicitor and John Cupp and Sheryl Heid serve as assistant county solicitors.

During Tuesday’s agenda meeting, Zimmerlink was seeking to place a motion on Thursday’s agenda to advertise for a request for qualifications from attorneys at law to provide legal services as county solicitor in accordance with the county code.

Zimmerlink said according to the county code, there could be a county solicitor and no more than three assistant county solicitors. She said different counties throughout Pennsylvania handle the legal contracts differently, including part-time solicitors, solicitors as county employees and having a contractual relationship with them.

Zimmerlink first mentioned looking into possibly having different county solicitors last year during budget planning, but neither Commissioner Vincent A. Vicites nor former Commissioner Joseph A. Hardy III supported that suggestion.

“Now is the time,” Zimmerlink said in making her motion to look into other options for county legal representation.

However, Vicites said he believes the county’s three county solicitors are very cost effective and other counties spend more, although he didn’t have a breakdown of what other counties spend.

“I’m satisfied with how we do it,” Vicites said.

Vicites pointed out that there have been few lawsuits over the years and the three county solicitors have done a good job.

Commission Chairman Vincent Zapotosky, who took office in January, said at the beginning of his term he had questions and concerns about what the three county solicitors handled, but he didn’t realize the demand that is put on the county solicitors.

“Ferens, Cupp and Heid do a good job. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” Zapotosky said. “They’re there when we need them. I feel no reason to change what isn’t broken.”

Zimmerlink then pointed out that she wasn’t necessarily advocating making any change, she merely wanted to see what was available.

“I didn’t say our solicitors are not qualified or are not doing a good job,” Zimmerlink said.

She said she merely wanted to make comparisons of what the county now pays to other proposals.

Vicites said the county solicitors are county employees, like the solicitors in Beaver, Washington and Greene counties and he didn’t know how the commissioners could put the job of a county employee out for bid.

Zimmerlink said she didn’t want to put the job out for bid, she wanted to see what other options are available. She pointed out that Washington County doesn’t provide benefits to its solicitor.

“It doesn’t hurt to look at other options,” Zimmerlink said.

Vicites said Washington County spends more money on solicitors without paying benefits.

When Zapotosky asked if a cost comparison is available, Zimmerlink said she didn’t want to do a cost comparison until she knew the proposal would be approved.

Vicites said he researched the issue last year, but didn’t have the information available.

According to the adopted 2008 budget, the total cost for solicitors this year is expected to be about $112,072. That figure includes a $33,150 salary for the county solicitor, a $45,180 salary for the assistant solicitors, $5,992 for employee benefits FICA and $27,749 for health insurance benefits.

“The structure is good and it works,” Vicites said.

Zapotosky said he didn’t want to do a “county see, county do approach,” but would be interested in seeing if the county could get a better bang for its buck.

Zapotosky said he has all the confidence in the world in the three county solicitors, but he would like to see if what the county is paying is cost effective.

Vicites said he has done his homework, adding that what the county does is cost effective.

Although Zimmerlink said it would not cost too much to advertise for a request for qualifications, her motion died due to a lack of a second.