Baker City Fire Chief Todd Jaynes being sworn into service on July 25, 2023. 

The attorney representing Baker City in former fire chief Todd Jaynes’ $999,999 civil lawsuit against the city has filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss the complaint.

Kirk Mylander, an attorney for CIS of Tigard, the city’s insurance provider, filed the motion Sept. 5 in Baker County Circuit Court.

Mylander is asking for oral arguments on his motion.

A hearing on Mylander’s motion has been scheduled for Nov. 1 at 1:30 p.m. in Circuit Court.

Mylander wrote in an email to the Baker City Herald that “Baker City strongly believes that the allegations are without merit and is vigorously defending the case to protect Baker City taxpayers.”

Jaynes’ attorney, Richard Slezak of Salem, declined to comment.

On Oct. 8, Mylander filed a document asking a judge to order Jaynes to return the $21,129 severance check he received from the city in March 2024. Mylander contends that Jaynes wasn’t entitled to severance pay because he was an at-will employee at the time.

Baker City Manager Barry Murphy fired Jaynes on March 8.

Slezak filed the lawsuit on Jaynes’ behalf on July 6.

Murphy’s predecessor, interim manager Jon France, hired Jaynes in July 2023.

On July 25, 2023, Jaynes signed a contract with the city that included a clause allowing the city to fire Jaynes “for convenience” if the city gave him severance pay equal to three months of his salary ($7,034 per month).

That agreement also includes a term of a minimum of five years “unless cause for termination or if Jaynes resigns.”

According to the lawsuit, Jaynes objected to the “convenience clause” during a July 7, 2023, interview with France.

“Plaintiff intended this to be his last job before retiring and he needed assurance that he would be employed for at least five years to allow sufficient time for his Oregon PERS retirement benefits to vest,” the lawsuit states.

Jaynes moved to Baker City from Jerome, Idaho.

According to the lawsuit, France, in response to Jaynes’ concern about the convenience clause, told him it was a formality.

Jaynes contends in the lawsuit that the city “included the condition of the convenience clause in the employment agreement for its benefit, but waived that condition when France advised plaintiff that including the convenience clause in the employment agreement was only a formality…”

Jaynes contends that France, the city council and Murphy were negligent because they didn’t recognize that the convenience clause, by allowing the city to fire Jaynes before five years had elapsed, was “irreconcilably inconsistent” with the employment agreement’s minimum duration of five years.

“Defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the inconsistent termination provisions in the employment agreement would create an unreasonable risk of harm to plaintiff,” the lawsuit states.

Defendant’s motion

In his Sept. 5 motion for dismissal, Mylander, the city’s attorney, disputed Jaynes’ claim that his firing constituted a breach of contract.

Mylander wrote that although Jaynes objected to the clause allowing the city to fire him within five years, and that France told Jaynes the clause was a formality, Jaynes signed the contract that included that clause.

Jaynes, with his lawsuit, is “requesting that this Court nullify the parts of the contract he does not like (the convenience clause and three months’ severance) and keep the parts he does like (a five-year term at full salary),” Mylander wrote in his motion.

Mylander also contends that the July 2023 contract with Jaynes is not legally binding on Murphy, who was hired in January 2024, or on the seven city councilors who were in office when Murphy fired Jaynes in March 2024.

None of those councilors was in office when Jaynes signed the contract in July 2023.

Mylander also noted in his brief that the contract states that none of its terms, including the clause allowing the city to fire Jaynes if he was given severance pay, could be changed or canceled unless both parties agreed in writing.

That wasn’t done, Mylander wrote in his motion.

Default motion

On Aug. 30, six days before Mylander filed his motion for dismissal, Slezak filed a notice in Baker County Circuit Court that he intended to apply for a default order.

That’s typically done when the plaintiff in a civil suit believes the defendant has failed to respond to the complaint.

There is nothing in the case records showing that Slezak has filed for a default order.