North Las Vegas seeks dismissal of suit by ex-city manager

Dan Kulin

Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 | 9:17 a.m.

North Las Vegas is asking a judge to dismiss the lawsuit filed by its former city manager, Kurt Fritsch, who is claiming the City Council violated the state open meetings law, the City Charter and his contract when they fired him in July.

In a legal motion filed Wednesday in District Court, the city's attorney argued there was nothing improper about Fritsch's firing. The possible firing was adequately posted in the meeting agenda, and the state constitution, charter and his contract made Fritsch an at-will employee, which meant the council could fire him at any time, the city's filing stated.

The case is scheduled to go before District Judge Jackie Glass on Dec. 10, at which time the judge could rule on the case, attorneys for both sides said.

Fritsch's attorney, Adam Levine, said he would probably file a counter-motion for the judge to consider, but he said he doesn't expect the judge will grant either motion for a decision on Dec. 10.

The council voted 5-0 on July 16 to fire Fritsch. Almost two months later Fritsch sued the city.

Fritsch's lawsuit claims the council violated the Open Meetings Act by not giving adequate notice of the firing on the meeting agenda.

The agenda stated the council would have a "discussion and possible action on the city manager's contract."

Levine has said that description wasn't specific enough, but city officials disagree.

The suit also alleges that according to the City Charter the council was required to give a written resolution to the city manager stating the reasons for his dismissal, after which the city manager has five days to request a public hearing on the matter.

At the time of the firing, City Attorney Sean McGowan said Fritsch's contract superseded the City Charter.

But in the motion filed with the court, the city claims the charter does not guarantee a city manager a written explanation or a public hearing because the charter says the council "may" follow that course of action, which means the decision is up to the council.

Also, the motion says that under the charter "there is no judicial review" of a city manager's termination.

McGowan said his initial belief on why the charter wouldn't conflict with Fritsch's contract was incorrect, the end result is the same.

"They still had a legal right to do what they did," McGowan said about the council's firing of Fritsch.

The city is being represented in this case by private attorney Gregory Smith. McGowan said he decided to use an outside attorney because he was involved in discussions with Fritsch and council members about the potential firing before it happened.

"I was pretty close to this," he said.

Fritsch's suit asks that the firing be voided and seeks unspecified monetary compensation.

Fritsch had about two years left on his contract when he was fired.

Since the vote, council members have been vague about why they decided to get rid of Fritsch, saying only that they wanted to go in a different direction.

About a week before the vote, the council rejected an offer from Fritsch that he resign in a few months and receive severance pay.

By firing Fritsch before the end of his contract, the council chose to pay him $127,066 to leave. The severance was half of his roughly $150,000 salary plus pay for any accrued vacation days and half of his unused sick days.