Thursday, July 21, 2016
Fairfield ordered to pay $93,570.57 in unpaid compensation to former employee.
In a written decision that followed a one-day bench trial held on June 27, 2016, Judge Geiger found that Robert R. Hulitt, Sr., who worked for the Township from March 2006 until he was terminated on March 12, 2014, was not properly compensated for having worked as temporary Township Administrator from July 1, 2009 until Joseph Veight replaced him on January 1, 2011. The court also noted that the Township violated state law by appointing Hulitt informally instead of by an appropriate authorizing resolution.
Judge Geiger found that Hulitt, who had no prior experience as an administrator, should be paid $35,000 per year for 549 days plus an additional 90 days as required by statute. He found that since Hulitt had "no formal training or certifications for the position of municipal clerk" and could not prove that he carried out the role of the clerk, he was not entitled to additional compensation for any clerk duties performed.
The next issue the court decided was whether Hulitt was properly terminated from his position as Code Enforcement/Zoning Officer for having issued an allegedly unauthorized $508.16 check to Edward Kimley for reimbursement of an escrow deposit relating to a land use application.
Judge Geiger found that the Township failed to establish good cause for Hulitt's firing. Therefore, since he was typically appointed as Code Enforcement/Zoning Officer for one year terms, the Township was ordered to pay him from the the date of his firing--March 13, 2014--through to December 31, 2014.
Finally, Judge Geiger found that Hulitt was entitled to be paid $19.55 per hour for 204 hours of unused vacation and sick time and for 14 hours that the court found were docked against Hulitt without justification.
Hulitt's lawsuit was filed in October 2014.
On July 7, 2016, in response to an OPRA Request, the Trico JIF (Fairfield's insurer) stated: "We have no information on any settlement. Coverage was declined under the GL policy and also declined by Summit Risk. The town may have handled this themselves, and you may go directly to them for any possible information." Accordingly, the $93,570.57 appears to have been paid entirely by Fairfield Township taxpayers.