X

State probe of District Attorney Rain could be costly to St. Lawrence County

Posted 4/23/16

By JIMMY LAWTON The St. Lawrence County Legislature’s request for an investigation for the potential removal of the district attorney could cost at least tens of thousands of dollars, and possibly …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

State probe of District Attorney Rain could be costly to St. Lawrence County

Posted

By JIMMY LAWTON

The St. Lawrence County Legislature’s request for an investigation for the potential removal of the district attorney could cost at least tens of thousands of dollars, and possibly much more, but Legislator Joseph Lightfoot said not addressing the problem could be expensive as well.

Legislators for the cash-strapped county voted 11-3 at a services committee meeting Monday to call on the state to initiate an investigation for the potential removal of District Attorney Mary Rain. The request will need approval from the full Board of Legislators before it can be submitted to the state. That could happen on Monday, April 25 at a special meeting.

And if the county submits its request to the state, and the governor or attorney general decide to initiate an investigation, the costs associated with the probe could fall on St. Lawrence County residents.

“If the proceeding be for the removal of a county or city officer, the reasonable expenses incurred in the conduct thereof shall be a county or city charge, as the case may be,” Section 34-7 of the state Public Officer’s Law states.

The issue of costs associated with an investigation was not discussed at Monday’s meeting, but the Republican-led legislature has already been looking for ways to close a $3 million gap by cutting costs and increasing revenues.

SUNY Canton Assistant Professor Alexander Lesyk, LD, was unable to estimate how much an investigation would cost, but he noted that almost any investigation can be costly and at a minimum would amount to tens of thousands of dollars.

Lesyk says he is hopeful the potential cost to taxpayers is one of the factors the county would consider when making a decision about whether or not to proceed with its call for an investigation.

When asked about the expense associated with investigation, Lightfoot, the Owsegatchie representative who penned the resolution, said he believes it’s necessary.

“It may cost some money to do this, but it could cost us more if we don’t. We have already spent upwards of $40,000 in attorneys fees to defend her in the couple cases. We are looking at a lawsuit filed by Brenna Ryan right now. It could cost us more if we don’t do something,” he said.

Lesyk was also quick to point out that just because the state can charge the counties for costs associated with investigation, it has historically not always done so.

“I have seen cases where the county was never charged,” he said.

He pointed to a Franklin County case that the attorney general’s office stepped in to prosecute, but the state did not end up charging the county for the work.

So there is at least some precedent that the state could choose not to send costs associated with the investigation back to the county. Lightfoot agreed that it is not entirely clear whether the county would be charged or not, but said he plans to move forward with the call for an investigation either regardless.

“We may be charged, but it’s hard to say. If you look at the law it says “reasonable expenses.” How is that defined? But we know her actions have and will continue to have financial consequences for the county. It may cost some money to do this, but I think it’s better than doing nothing,” he said.

Lesyk said officials would be prudent to act under the assumption that the county will be charged, because the law states that the counties could be charged.

Another factor that may play a role in the decision to call on the state to investigate Rain is the time remaining on her term in office compared to the length of an investigation. Even a speedy investigation would likely take months to complete and Rain’s term runs through December of 2017.

Lesyk said removing a district attorney from office is extremely rare and pointed out that such actions haven’t occurred since the 1950s. Historically, it appears more common that district attorneys facing allegations deemed to be credible by the public tend to resign their posts.

“More likely than an investigation leading to the removal of a public officer, the person in question steps down,” he said. “You have to trust your district attorney. If the public doesn’t trust the prosecutor how are they going to be able to convince a jury to make a conviction? If that trust is gone, the more noble thing to do is step down,” he said.

It’s important to note that Lesyk was speaking to historical situations and hypotheticals. He did not state or imply that he believed Rain was in such a position.

“That’s not really something I can comment on. I don’t know how the public views the district attorney,” he said.