Dormont Civil Service Commission To Announce Decision In Phil Ross Appeal

Dormont’s Civil Service Commission will announce its decision of Phil Ross’ from chief to sergeant on Tuesday.

The commission could uphold council's to demote Ross in March or it could reinstate him.

If the commission does overturn the discipline, that apparently won't mean Ross’ immediate return to chief.

The borough plans to appeal the decision to the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, according to manager Gino Rizza.

Ross would remain demoted pending the outcome of that appeal, according to Chris Gabriel, the borough’s labor attorney,

Also, Ross was , to patrolman.

Ross is appealing that demotion, too, and said he hopes the commission can address that appeal as well Tuesday.

“The second demotion was more ridiculous than the first one,” he said.

Ross said he's optimistic that he'll win his initial appeal.

Based on testimony at Ross' appeal hearing, council demoted him because it found him insubordinate and unable to carry out the job as council wanted. Ross did not testify, but has maintained that some council members, along with Rizza, are overstepping their authority.

Michael Witherel, the commission's solicitor, said the commission is tasked with providing an independent review of the borough's actions.

But unlike a criminal case, where the prosecution must offer proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the borough's burden to make its case is less stringent.

"Is there substantial evidence to support the action of the borough?" Witherel said. Whatever they find, he said, the commission will have to state it's findings for the record.

Gabriel explained the commission is being asked a narrow question.

“They are being asked: Did the employee do what the borough council said he did and if he did, was the penalty that was imposed unlawful?” he said.

“If it’s yes he did and not otherwise unlawful, then civil service commission is required to uphold the penalty,” he said.

Unlawful, he said, would be punishment that’s arbitrary, capricious or discriminatory.

“Arbitrary or capricious, that’s not their gut saying that this was unfair,” he said. “That means was there evidence on the record to substantiate that the elected body that made the decision did so for completely capricious reasons. And that’s a pretty high standard.”

“I think because (Ross) didn’t present a case, it would be an extraordinary thing” to overturn the demotion, Gabriel said.

Ross' attorney did not return messages to be interviewed for this story.

Residents Mary Cothran, Don Militzer Sr. and George V. Papuga III make up the board.