YOUNGSTOWN — The Mahoning County commissioners and their county administrator have reached a tentative settlement in the lawsuit filed against them by a county maintenance worker.

Ricky Morrison alleged he was fired last year for supporting the general-election opponent of Commissioner Carol Rimedio Righetti.

Details of the settlement are not being released, such as the settlement amount and terms.

Documents in the case in U.S. District Court state that Commissioners Carol Rimedio Righetti, David Ditzler and Anthony Traficanti and Administrator Audrey Tillis and their attorneys held negotiations with Morrison and his attorneys three days last week, resulting in a tentative agreement Friday.

In total, the parties, including lawyers for the county’s insurance company, met for 10 hours last week. The commissioners personally had to attend two sessions.

“The agreement should be kept confidential and is not to be publicly disclosed until the final agreement is executed,” according to a judgment entry from Magistrate Carmen Henderson in Youngstown federal court. The final agreement is to be completed within 60 days, the entry states.

Morrison filed the federal civil rights lawsuit against the county commissioners and Tillis in late December, alleging he was improperly fired. The suit alleged intimidation, bribery, telecommunications fraud, interference with civil rights, dereliction of duty, failure to report crimes and violating the state’s open meetings act.

When contacted Monday, Ditzler, Traficanti and attorney Martin Desmond, who represents Morrison, said they would not comment on the tentative agreement, though Ditzler clarified that the county’s insurance company is responsible for any settlement amounts, not the county.

Tillis and Rimedio Righetti could not be reached Monday, a federal holiday, and Gina DeGenova, county prosecutor, said her office “is in no way involved in this matter. I was dismissed from this matter, and the remaining defendants have their own counsel.”

THE CLAIM

The suit stated that Morrison was undergoing cancer treatment when he was fired Dec. 2 by the county because of his support in last November’s general election for Republican Geno DiFabio, who ran unsuccessfully against Rimedio Righetti, the Democratic incumbent.

DeGenova, who was acting county prosecutor at the time the suit was filed, said Dec. 13 that after getting an email from Subodh Chandra, one of Morrison’s attorneys, she investigated the matter and determined Tillis and not the county commissioners fired Morrison.

DeGenova said Tillis’ decision was not proper because she didn’t have the authority to do that and wrote in a Dec. 13 email to Chandra that Tillis’ “action was not politically motivated.” The decision to fire Morrison rests with the commissioners, and they “will not ratify the action taken by” Tillis, DeGenova wrote.

Morrison was reinstated Dec. 14 and didn’t lose any pay or have his health care benefits stopped.

But the lawsuit quotes conversations Traficanti had with Morrison and DiFabio in which Traficanti said the commissioners met in a Dec. 1 executive session and over his objections, the two others voted to fire Morrison.

Recent filings in the case do not provide many clues as to the substance of the negotiations other than on June 7, Morrison’s lawyers objected to a request by the county’s attorneys that the lawyer for the county’s insurance carrier, CORSA, not have to attend negotiations June 14 in person.

The Chandra-Desmond filing stated that the “parties and insurer have been on reasonable notice about the mediation for quite some time,” adding that in their experience, having the insurance counsel in attendance in person “enhances the prospects of success.”

Without that, there is “less investment in the process by those holding the purse strings, devaluation of the existence and magnitude of emotional damages and key decision makers literally ‘phoning it in’ and multitasking with digital distraction.”

The filing noted that “If the settlement gap in this case is to be closed, in-person attendance by both CORSA representatives is essential,” adding: “Two representatives have been assigned because of the inherent conflicts between defendant Traficanti’s position and the other county defendants’ positions — all the more reasons in this case why those representatives should continue to be required to attend in person.”

The magistrate said the CORSA representatives had to attend in person.