Albany County DA asks legislature to normalize state grant 'bonuses' into salaries; outside communications contract draws questions

Albany County District Attorney Jacob requested a budget amendment at the Albany County Legislature meeting to fold state grant-funded bonus payments into the office’s regular salary structure and to move line items within the existing budget rather than raise the overall appropriation.

The amendment, presented by the DA, would reclassify recurring grant-funded payments that had been treated as variable bonuses into fixed salary lines ranging from deputy positions through entry-level assistant district attorney classifications. The DA said this is “budget neutral,” adding that the office “built those bonuses into a new salary structure.”

The change follows years in which state grant money arrived as uneven bonus payments, the DA said, producing “wildly different” payouts among attorneys. He told legislators the office eliminated ad hoc bonuses and instead set formal salary bands (“deputy, assistant deputy, bureau chiefs, and then VA 6 5 4 3 2 1”) to standardize pay.

Why it matters: the revision affects how grant funds appear in the county budget and how staff pay is administered, and it prompted detailed questions about specific line items and outside contracts from members of the Legislature.

Legislators pressed the DA about two communications-related expenses. A county member asked about an $80,000 director of communications position (filled); the DA confirmed the position is filled by an internal staff member, Ben Dellamater, and said the office also has a $45,000 contract for outside communications services administered through the Contract Administration Board (CAB). The DA acknowledged that the outside contractor who scored highest in the solicitation was also the DA’s former campaign manager. He said, “I wasn't involved in the scoring room,” and that the outside vendor’s proposal included communications, social media and lobbying support that the DA said helped him advance legislative priorities.

Several legislators expressed concern about appearance and procurement. One member said, “I have some issues with that,” and questioned whether it was appropriate to hire a former campaign manager. Another member noted inflammatory opinions they had seen associated with the outside communications output but said they would still support the budget reclassification.

The DA sought to emphasize transparency. He told the Legislature he had “put all the numbers on paper and [was] handing it to you,” asserting the change was intended to remove off‑book bonus authority and make the pay structure auditable.

Authorities and funding: the DA referenced state grant programs including aid-to-prosecution and discovery-related grants, and referenced New York State prosecutorial training and association entities in explaining the persistence of that funding stream. The DA described that funding as effectively permanent based on his experience with prior administrations and state practice, saying, “As best as we can tell it’s permanent.”

Actions and next steps: the DA presented the amendment for the committee’s consideration and asked the Legislature to approve the reclassification. The transcript records questions and debate but does not include a recorded final vote tally or a formal passage statement for the amendment in the provided excerpt.

Ending: Legislators said they would continue to review the proposal and related procurement records through the appropriate committee and oversight channels; the DA said he would provide the documentation and that his office’s goal is to streamline pay while maintaining transparency.