Pinal Board at Odds with County Attorney on Staffing

At the end of the meeting on Aug. 27, the board approved a motion to seek outside counsel. The rift started when Miller appointed attorney Ian Daranyi — previously serving as the assistant bureau chief of the Civil Division for six months — to the chief civil deputy position on July 28. That appointment was subsequently rejected by the board with the justification that Daranyi does not meet the minimum qualifications, specifically that he does not have enough managerial experience.

Each entity is now at odds over whether the board has the power to reject an appointment of a county employee over a lack of qualifications. According to Supervisor Jeffrey McClure, another sticking point has been what Daranyi’s salary would be, alleging that Miller wanted to hire Daranyi at above the average salary for the position when he did not meet the qualifications.

“The person he wants to employ does not meet the minimum qualifications, he’s been an attorney long enough but has no management experience. And he wants to hire him above midpoint,” McClure said. The midpoint is the average salary listed for the position.

Miller disagreed, and in a Sept. 3 statement, he said, “the law allows the elected County Attorney to best address the needs of the County as the public prosecutor. Which is why I sent a letter to the County Manager and Board of Supervisors in a last effort to work together for the benefit of Pinal County; it didn’t make a difference.”

“Unfortunately, they have taken the position that their authority includes the ability to say who an elected official can hire, the number of attorneys to be employed, and how best to structure the legal department of the County,” Miller stated.

In a letter sent to the board on Aug. 22, Miller described the hiring qualifications as “arbitrary.” Despite not meeting the number of years, he felt Daranyi was qualified.

“Ian has more than one year of supervisory experience, but not six years,” Miller wrote in the letter. “However, I believe based upon 18 years of legal experience in both the government and civilian sectors and based upon my authority as an elected official, that Ian has the legal acumen and ability to be a successful Deputy Chief.”

“I call the current requirements arbitrary because a law school graduate who has never practiced law in Arizona but has supervised attorneys for six years would qualify without having spent a day practicing law in Pinal County,” Miller wrote in the letter.

Miller himself has sought outside counsel to determine whether the board could reject Daranyi’s appointment. He sought the opinion of Valley attorney Timothy La Sota, who concluded that the board’s power in making such a determination was “ministerial” only.

“My conclusion is whatever powers the Board has to consent to, or not consent to, someone chosen by the County Attorney to be his Deputy Chief are ministerial only, meaning the Board is required to consent to your selection unless the Board can clearly show that … (you) acted unreasonably, arbitrarily, and capriciously in making the appointment,” La Sota wrote.

This is where McClure’s point about Daranyi’s salary will come in. According to the law at play here, ARS 11-409, county officers can appoint employees “with the consent of, and at salaries fixed by the board.”

In Miller’s statement, he said he would seek the court’s intervention and added that “when parties cannot agree on legal issues, they seek answers from the courts. It is my hope that I can quickly get back to my main responsibility: to hire the staff necessary to protect our way of life.”

Beth Goulden, spokesperson for the Pinal County Attorney’s Office, did not immediately respond to follow-up questions for clarity on the court’s intervention and whether that suggested a possible lawsuit.

Supervisor Steve Miller hoped that the county attorney would “see the light” and was worried that this dispute might signify a recurrence of a broader issue over the boundaries between the board and the County Attorney’s Office.

With the board’s motion to seek outside conflict counsel, their choice may be made by the next regular meeting, on Sept. 17, he said.