Council approves District Attorney’s staffing reorganizations amid questions on union rules and auditing

Northampton County Council approved several District Attorney Office personnel actions on May 15, mostly by 6–1 votes, after extended discussion about union procedures and budget implications.

Council recorded approvals included upgrades to multiple assistant district attorney positions and several clerical and supervisory reorganizations effective May 16, 2025. John Giovanni introduced the resolutions and read the formal pay‑grade and salary changes into the record. The measures as presented included upgrading one full‑time assistant district attorney 1 position and moving four assistant district attorney 1 positions to a higher pay grade; creation of a case management/assistant administrator data analyst position and a paralegal/clerical specialist position in place of two clerical technician positions; and upgrades for an office supervisor, an administrative assistant, and a child abuse coordinator/victim advocate. The council recorded votes of 6 to 1 on the contested items; one council member voted no on multiple personnel items.

The district attorney (speaking during debate) described the moves as an internal reorganization to improve data management, prosecutorial management software support, discovery redaction and juvenile court support. He said one new specialist will manage the prosecutorial management software and another hire will serve as a paralegal to handle discovery and juvenile support. He told council the changes were funded by grant pass‑through and existing budgeted funds and said the office remains “still way under my budget” despite the reorganizations.

Several council members raised procedural questions. Council member Brown asked whether the changes complied with the collective bargaining agreement and whether the union had been consulted; Brown said eliminating and reclassifying positions could prompt an unfair labor practice (ULP) complaint. Human Resources Director Ms. Cavalli told council she would review the contracts and, if necessary, contact union representatives. Another council member asked about “desk audits” for multi‑step salary increases; staff said the actions were supported by grant funding and transfers and that HR and budget staff would confirm compliance.

Council also raised a budget risk scenario: if newly created positions remain in county personnel listings but are not funded, the county could face budget pressure if the district attorney fills them. County staff acknowledged that the district attorney has hiring authority under the state constitution but said the DA indicated he had funds available as structured. On several votes the motion carried 6–1; the minutes record repeated assurances that staff would follow up with HR and the solicitor’s office to confirm collective bargaining compliance and budget effects.