$6 million bill the county didn’t want made public

By Keri Brenner | The Olympian • Published March 11, 2007

Comments (0)

But the sheer size of the price tag is eye-popping, officials say. “A $6 million public employment case is off the charts,” said Hill, whose agency is based in Tumwater. “It is by far the largest public employment case that the risk pool has dealt with since it was founded in 1988.”

Details of case: Broyles vs. Thurston County

•Distinction: At a cost of almost $6 million, it is the most expensive public employment case paid by the Washington Counties Risk Pool, an insurance entity that contracts with private insurance companies to cover legal liability for public agencies, since it was founded in 1988.

•Issues: Three former prosecutors who worked for Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney Ed Holm from 2000 to 2002 claimed sexual discrimination and retaliation in relation to job promotions, pay, job assignments, instances of verbal sexual innuendo or sexual slurs, and a hostile working environment.

•Counties involved: Thurston, Mason, Grays Harbor, Kitsap.

•Plaintiffs: Former deputy prosecuting attorneys Audrey Broyles, Susan Sackett-DanPullo and Vonda Sargent.

•Defendants: Originally four — Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney Ed Holm; senior deputy prosecuting attorneys Phil Harju and Jim Powers; and the county itself. Harju and Powers were dismissed early on; Holm was removed as a defendant when the case, originally filed in Thurston County, was refiled in 2004 in Mason County.

•Number of defense attorneys: Originally four, plus associates: Jack Kennedy of Gig Harbor, for Ed Holm; Jennifer Bucher of Garvey Schubert & Barer, Seattle, for Phil Harju; and Colleen Kinerk of Cable, Langenbach, Kinerk & Bauer, Seattle, for Jim Powers. Mike Patterson of the Seattle law firm Lee, Smart, Cook Martin and Patterson was hired by Washington Counties Risk Pool to defend Thurston County.

•Number of days of trial in Mason County: 22, from Oct. 31 to Nov. 21, 2006.

Costs from 2002 to present

•$1.52 million: Jury award to three former Thurston County prosecutors.

•$1.45 million: Trial judge award of plaintiffs’ attorney fees.

•$2.3 million: Legal defense fees and court costs paid by liability insurers under contract with Washington Counties Risk Pool on behalf of Thurston County.

•$250,000: Legal bills paid by Thurston County under liability insurance deductible.

•$50,000: Projected cost of pending appeal with state Court of Appeals in Tacoma.

•$200,000: Salary and benefits paid to Audrey Broyles from 2002 to 2004, when her job was reinstated but she was not allowed to return to work.

•$50,000: Approximate cost to hire independent investigator and then to resolve public records dispute with The Olympian in 2002, including The Olympian’s legal fees, over release of the investigator’s report.

•TOTAL: $5.82 million.

Thurston County’s risk manager, Tammy Devlin of the county human resources department, said it was not yet clear if the county’s risk pool premium cost would be altered further by the case. She said three balancing variables were:

• The overall risk is spread among the 28 counties that belong to the risk pool.

• The calculations are spread — or “smoothed out” — over a five-year period to avoid a big spike in any one year.

• The liability insurance records are combined with other Thurston County insurance policies’ claims records in calculating the county’s relative risk.

The lawsuit, Broyles vs. Thurston County, was filed Aug. 23, 2001, by former Thurston County deputy prosecuting attorneys Audrey Broyles, Susan Sackett-DanPullo and Vonda Sargent. The prosecutors, who all worked for Holm, claimed the office was run like a “good-old-boys- network.”

They alleged that they and other women employees faced sexual discrimination in promotions and pay and a hostile working environment — including inappropriate sexual comments such as references to women’s breasts and other female body parts. Much of the testimony at the trial focused on male prosecutors being assigned more high-profile felony cases and having greater authority than the female prosecutors — as opposed to any sexual bantering.

Holm, re-elected to office in November, said last week the allegations were false, but that the case was mismanaged by the county.

“I wasn’t able to do a damn thing, and I frankly think I could have done a better job,” he said.

He said he still believes he “didn’t do anything wrong” and that he tried to give the women pay increases and promotions.

“I made some mistakes, and I could have handled it better, but I didn’t do anything wrong,” he said.

<< Previous page

Next page >>