Court battle may force salary revamp for Lynn mayor, officials

Three years into Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy?s term and, as she readies for a re-election campaign later this year, her dispute over the pay she receives remains unsettled.But it?s not higher pay Kennedy is fighting for. Rather, she?s seeking affirmation of the much lower compensation she has taken than her immediate predecessor.Kennedy, sticking to a promise she made as a candidate for mayor, has accepted annual pay of $82,500, the salary for the job last approved by the City Council in June 1998. It is more than $60,000 less than former Mayor Edward “Chip” Clancy Jr. received.When Clancy left office his annual earnings topped $145,000, which included salary of $102,000, plus longevity and education incentive pay. The highest single-year pay Clancy received was $147,583 in 2008.Kennedy told The Item this week that a six-figure salary is not unreasonable for the mayor of Lynn, but she contends the process to determine the mayor?s pay has been illegal for nearly 15 years.By ordinance, members of the Lynn City Council receive a salary of 15 percent of the mayor?s pay, and Kennedy says councilors? pay, which today is based on the higher pay Clancy received, has likewise been inflated over the same period.?I?m not voluntarily giving up money,” Kennedy said last Wednesday. “We?re the ninth-largest city in Massachusetts, something over $100,000 (in salary for the mayor) is appropriate. I am taking what I see as the legal, set amount, last voted on by the City Council in 1998.”Kennedy added, “I want to know if the old way of calculating the mayor?s salary is legally sufficient, or if, as state law and the City Charter says, the mayor gets a salary that is approved by the City Council.”That question is the center of a three-year legal battle between Kennedy and Clancy. Kennedy, soon after she was sworn in, in 2010, withheld roughly $33,000 in benefits pay that Clancy insists was due him upon leaving office.Dual lawsuitsKennedy obtained outside counsel and filed suit on behalf of the city against Clancy, saying the city should keep the money. Clancy filed a countersuit, seeking to get that money plus damages and legal fees.Clancy has requested a jury trial, and the lawsuits are pending in Superior Court.Kennedy, like Clancy, is an attorney and doesn?t expect the case to be resolved soon.?They completed discovery of my deposition over two days. It was finished this month and it started in November of 2011,” Kennedy said. “Next on the to-do list will be Mayor Clancy?s deposition, within 30 to 60 days.”Kennedy said the case could go to trial or be resolved by summary judgment. Either way, she said, the ruling will not likely be in time to affect the salary for the next four-year mayoral term that begins next January.According to City Charter, the City Council must establish salary for mayor, to take effect at the start of the next term, within the first 18 months of the council?s two-year term.If the court ultimately sides with Kennedy, however, it would force a restructuring not only of the mayor?s pay but also of City Councilors? and City Hall department heads? pay.Severing pay linksKennedy was propelled into office in the fall of 2009 – edging Clancy by a 27-vote margin – with the backing of supporters of the late former Mayor Patrick J. McManus. She was a sticker candidate and latecomer to the race after McManus died that summer while campaigning against Clancy to regain the mayor?s job.Yet it was action by McManus and the city?s Law Department in 1997, linking the mayor?s pay to contracts awarded to a municipal union, that is the foundation of Kennedy?s argument (see story on Page A1).As a city councilor, Kennedy long argued that the link between union contracts and pay for mayor and departments heads should be severed. While as a councilor her argument was ignored, she continues the fight as mayor today with the lawsuit against Clancy.As far back as May 2004, when she was a member of the council?s personnel committee, Kennedy impl