CORRECTION: THE FINAL SUM THAT WAS PAID TO THE LEGAL FIRM REPRESENTING THE CITY IS HIGHER, AT $338,695 MAKING THE TOTAL EXPENSES TO THE CITY $2,048,695.
Last night in a unanimous vote, the City Council approved a financial settlement with former City Attorney Steve Morris and former City Manager Alfonso Noyola. The settlements reached are for the sums of $995, 000 for Morris and for $715,000 with Noyola.
The issue has been contentious and ongoing for years now. The two employees were dismissed in October 2020 after attempting to terminate their employment in August that same year. As ‘at will’ employees, they serve at the privilege of the Council and can be terminated with or without cause at almost any time six months after, or before, a City Council election. What had been disputed is whether proper processes were followed in their termination and the denial of the severance that both, according to their contracts, were owed. Another attempt to settle the matter was made in June of 2021, which we shared with you HERE.
At the time of their termination, the severance that was due to each of them was:
Morris: $259,458.15
Noyola: $234,613.97
However, neither was paid. At issue has been the ongoing breach of contract cases as well as separate employment discrimination cases filed by both, and has been escalated on appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court. A summary of the legal activities (provided by the City) can be found here:
- On August 3, 2020, Mr. Morris and Mr. Noyola filed an action in the Eighth Judicial
District Court, Case No. A-20-818973-C alleging various claims. - On December 22, 2020, January 5, 2021 and April 30, 2021 the district court
entered orders dismissing all but the breach of contract claims alleged by Mr.
Morris and Mr. Noyola. - Mr. Morris and Mr. Noyola appealed these decisions to the Nevada Supreme
Court, Case Nos. 82456 and 82986. - Mr. Morris and Mr. Noyola also filed charges of discrimination with the Nevada
Equal Rights Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
and were each issued right to sue letters. - On December 2, 2022, Mr. Morris filed a separate action in the Eighth Judicial
District Court Case No. A-22-862038-C alleging various claims of employment
discrimination. - On July 29, 2022, Mr. Noyola filed a separate action in the Eighth Judicial District
- Court Case No. A-22-856170-C alleging various claims of employment
discrimination.
The city has an insurer for these types of claims, which is an organization called POOL/PACT. The city pays into a fund shared by other municipalities to cover such types of issues if they arise. If they approve the $1,710,000 sum, then they cover those costs. If not, then the financial responsibility falls to us in Boulder City. Which we can cover from the Risk Management Fund should we need to.
You can watch the video of last night’s proceedings in Council HERE. (Discussion and public comment begin at the 39:20 mark ending with the vote at 1:09:00.)
The settlement amounts may seem excessive to some. At the time of the terminations of both of these gentlemen, along with the later termination of City Clerk, Lou Krumm, there was little else talked of in town. Many defended both Noyola and Morris both for their job performance and disagreed with the way the council was treating them at the time of their termination. Others took to social media with outcries of prior corruption and spoke negatively about each, some to extremes. It was I think most would agree, a highly negative time and maybe not one of our shining moments in Boulder City.
All five members of that prior City Council were replaced over the last two election cycles, and many point to the way that these terminations were handled to be one of the reasons for that.
The total costs as they now stand break out about like this, for comparison:
What is not known by us is what Mr. Morris’s and Noyola’s legal costs have been to date.
Also questioned was why the matter was a part of what is called the ‘Consent Agenda’. This is the first piece of the agenda in each meeting where there is no open discussion among Council and is approved, or modified and approved, as is. Mayor Hardy explained at the beginning of the session that because of the private legal matters at hand, that open discussion was not appropriate.
If you watch last night’s public comment, you’ll see the former Mayor, Kiernan McManus, along with a few other citizens, defending the decisions of the prior council. No one spoke in favor of the settlement during the public comment period.
We reached out to both Al Noyola and Steve Morris for comment, but the only one who responded was Morris, simply saying, “I am grateful it will soon be resolved.”
The only other statement from the City is as follows from Boulder City Mayor Joe Hardy, M.D:
“The settlement agreements put before this open meeting by the City Council resolve several claims against the City. These claims were pending a decision by the State’s Supreme Court, likewise, claims for breach of employment contracts and wrongful termination were pending against the City in the Eighth Judicial District Court. These claims are now fully resolved with the action taken on April 25, 2023.
Any and all claims that were alleged or could be alleged by the parties are also resolved. The decision resulted from confidential litigation settlement protocols as allowed in Nevada Statutes.
Claims by affected parties are hereby resolved. No further litigation is required allowing for the satisfaction of all sides without further risk or adverse judgments. I believe that it is in the best interest of all parties involved to put this behind us.”
