In the filing, an attorney representing employees of the MCPDO alleges a history of “gross and unlawful compensation disparities between the Public Defender’s Office and the Prosecutor’s Office in Montgomery County, Ohio.”
The allegation is largely based on a rule in the Ohio Administrative Code that says the “supporting staff, facilities, equipment, supplies, and other requirements needed to maintain and operate an office of a ... county public defender ... shall be substantially equivalent to that provided for the county prosecutor’s office.”
This rule goes on to clarify that the “salaries for public defender attorneys shall approximate and be in parity with the compensation received by a prosecutors with comparable years in practice and experience.”
Plaintiffs in the case allege that the county has “continually and intentionally ignored the parity requirements,” and has instead allowed for “vast disparities in compensation and resources” between the MCPDO and the Montgomery County Prosecutor’s Office (MCPO).
Plaintiffs allege this has been the case since 2015. Their filing demonstrated recent disparities, particularly in year-end bonuses.
A chart included in the plaintiff’s filing shows the following total bonus breakdown for each office:
• In 2024, $1.4 million in bonuses were awarded within the county prosecutor’s office, compared to $318,518 for public defenders and staff.
• In 2023, that comparison was $1.8 million to $171,960; in 2022 it was $1.5 million to $707,034; in 2021 it was $814,776 to $199,048; and in 2020 it was $1.1 million to $59,540.
In 2023, the largest bonus given to a county assistant prosecutor was $51,566, the lawsuit alleges; The largest bonus to a public defender was $2,012.
The plaintiffs allege that Montgomery County Prosecutor Mat Heck has continually accepted and requested funding from the county for vacant positions with the intent of “distributing the funds allocated for those vacant positions as additional year end compensation to bolster the compensation of prosecutors in the prosecutor’s office.”
“These funding disparities between the MCPO and the MCPDO creates (sic) huge disadvantages to the public defenders who are employed by the MCPDO,” the plaintiffs argue. “Primarily, it makes the MCPDO less competitive in the search for and hiring of qualified, competent attorneys and staff, leaving the MCPDO understaffed and overworked in comparison to the staffing of the MCPO.”
They argue that the disparities leave their office less effective “against a more highly compensated and, as a result, better staffed, and thus better prepared prosecutor’s office.”
There has not yet been a legal response from the county. Messages left with the prosecutor’s office and county offices named in the suit were not immediately returned.
Plaintiffs in the case include public defenders Michael Dailey, William Ehrstine and Susan Souther; staffers Debra Burs and Paul Nerone; former staffer Cynthia Packet; and former Montgomery County public defender Travis Dunnington.
Note: This is a developing story and will be updated as more information becomes available.
For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It’s free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening.
Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
About the Author
