Feb. 23, 2005 - While he was working as the town attorney for Oro Valley, Mark Langlitz appeared to be a pretty typical lawyer.

He greeted people with a smile and a handshake, in a well-kept suit and neutral tie, and used his by-the-book approach and deep knowledge of municipal law to further his winning record as the town's legal expert.

But during the past year, Langlitz, 47, has watched everything that seemed normal and routine changed to a life unrecognizable as his own.

Last October, the attorney left his position as chief of Oro Valley's legal department to work in the civil division of the Pima County Attorney's Office. At the time, he said it was to pursue a new opportunity.

But Langlitz has since changed his tune, saying he didn't leave the town on his own accord, but instead was pressured to leave after numerous threats to his position. He said the threats were over an investigation he was conducting into the campaign finances and activities of an independent expenditure committee, OV Candidates 2004, which worked to support five town council candidates, four of whom were elected to the town council last May.

In November, Langlitz was fired from his county job after a letter he wrote asking to be reinstated to the Oro Valley position was faxed to the county from Oro Valley's town hall. He said that when his new bosses saw that he was not a "team player" they decided to let him go.

Langlitz is convinced that the move to send the letter was one of retaliation over the OV Candidates 2004 investigation. He is convinced that some council members, furious with his actions, wanted to get even, and said the effort goes beyond that letter to allegations of stalking and threats that have not only cost him his job, but have smeared his integrity.

But while some council members admit they were curious about the investigation and often asked questions, none characterize the queries as pressure or threats.

And while some say that personalities often conflicted over a number of legal issues in the town, sometimes to the extreme, no one believes they ever said or implied Langlitz's head was on the chopping block.

Now, often clad in blue jeans and smelling of fast food and cigarettes, Langlitz hasn't completely given up his habits as an attorney. He still carries a briefcase, but instead of holding contracts and ordinances, it is heavy with the paper trail that led him to professional, and personal, shambles.

The path that he says may now end with him ultimately suing council members for destroying his career.

In December, Langlitz filed a letter with the town asking that he be immediately reinstated to the town attorney position until he could find another comparable job and be reimbursed by the town for lost income, retroactive to Nov. 12, from the day he was fired from the county. He asked for the issue to be placed on the Dec. 15 council agenda, but the day came and went without discussion of the settlement offer and the town has continued its search for a new legal chief.

Langlitz has now told his attorney to file a notice of claim with the town. If it does not respond within 60 days of receiving the letter, Langlitz said he will likely file a lawsuit against the council. The town had not received the notice as of press time.

Langlitz said he will be seeking damages for not only loss of wages from the time he was fired from the county position until now, but also for defamation of character and suffering caused by the loss of his job.

The sharp legal mind behind the fast-growing Community of Excellence has seen his house foreclosed and car repossessed in recent months, after going from a $90,000 a year job, to searching out any legal opportunity in Arizona. So far, his search has come up empty.

Langlitz says he quit his position as the town's attorney because he felt his job was threatened, and he could not run the risk of being fired. Recently divorced, he has a teen-aged daughter living in Oro Valley, and he said he has tried to do everything he can to stay near her.

"This is serious, what they did to me. They have taken away my livelihood," he said of the council members he is accusing. "I don't think they really understand what this has done to my career."

He said that when he first proposed a settlement it was because he needed money to address his immediate financial needs, and he was looking aggressively for another job. But after casting his net wide, Langlitz said he realized the opportunities are slim, and with word of his circumstances spreading through the small legal community, he feels the odds of securing another position, particularly one working in a municipality, are small.

He said he did not want to sue the town, and that is why he first tried talking with the council members to work something out.

"I proposed a settlement to try to get this resolved quick and move on," he said. "But I guess it's going to take a lawsuit."

THE ELECTION

Langlitz came to this point by way of a twisted path he said he knew was dangerous, but which seemed unavoidable.

It was mid-spring of last year, and the campaigns to fill five vacant council seats were in full swing.

The political climate was a fierce one, with a strong group of citizens lobbying hard for a change in the way Oro Valley was doing business. Citizens were unhappy with how the town was being developed, and were particularly incensed over a series of three economic development agreements that had been adopted, which would result in the sharing of millions of sales tax dollars with big developers, and the razing of millions of square feet of desert for shopping centers. A revised General Plan had failed at the polls because of what many citizens said was a distrust of local government.

Langlitz had direct involvement in several of the issues that motivated some council members to run for office.

He gave advice to Town Clerk Kathi Cuvelier that she should reject petitions from citizens seeking a referendum on two of the three incentive agreements. Included among the names signed on those petitions were then candidates and now council members Conny Culver and Helen Dankwerth. The two women and Kenneth "K.C." Carter campaigned against the incentives.

In Pima County Superior Court, it was twice ruled that the incentives were not referable, however, the Court of Appeals overturned the ruling involving a $23.2 million tax-sharing agreement with Vestar Development Co. earlier this month.

Langlitz opined on another issue close to at least two residents who would later become council members.

When a Michigan-based development company, Beztak, proposed an apartment-retail complex on the southeast corner of the intersection of La Cañada Drive and Lambert Lane, Culver and Terry Parish, who both lived near the Beztak property at the time, spoke out during public hearings against putting apartments on the site. But Langlitz said the developer had the legal right to build the apartments there.

At the first council meeting of the new members in June, the council voted 5 to 2 to halt construction on the site because the developer had missed several town-imposed grading and landscaping deadlines. Mayor Paul Loomis and Carter opposed the action.

Beztak later sued the town for more than $1 million and the right to continue building, but the case was settled out of court, with Beztak now moving forward with the development.

These hot button issues sparked a flurry of political activity at the time among not only candidates, but also residents, and heard the loudest in the election arena was a handful of constituents who had decided to put their money behind the campaign, to the tune of about $18,000.

OV Candidates 2004 was an independent expenditure committee, formed to fund change in Oro Valley. Its primary contributors were Bill Adler, Celta Sheppard and Carl Kuehn.

Well into the campaigns, allegations began to surface that perhaps OV Candidates was not as independent as it claimed to be. Residents and other candidates began to say that the group was working in coordination with some of the candidates, specifically, Carter, Culver, Dankwerth, Barry Gillaspie and Richie Feinberg. All but Feinberg would be elected May 19.

Langlitz heard these allegations, but largely ignored them, until specific campaign literature began to show up on his desk, left there by residents and town employees.

The town received a complaint from an anonymous citizen, delivered by high-profile Phoenix attorney Lisa Hauser, further asserting this cooperation.

Still, Langlitz said he didn't want to get involved, but did forward the complaint to the county attorney and Arizona Attorney General.

More literature turned up and people continued to complain. The attorney general never responded and the county said it would not look into the matter because there was no sworn complaint.

This was Langlitz's crossroad. He saw the twisted path clearly; he knew heading down it would mean he would be investigating people who may well end up controlling his fate. But, at the same time, he said if he did nothing, others could accuse him of not protecting the interests of the town - his charge as its attorney.

"I looked at the statutes and I looked at what an independent expenditure committee is Š the statute says there is no coordination or cooperation, and none in my view means none. What you have to do to preserve your independent status is to build a wall between your activities and the activities of the candidates or their agents," he said.

"My concern was protecting the integrity of the election process in the town regardless of whether they (candidates supported by OV Candidates 2004) were elected or not, something had to be done. This is my thought process. Now the question is, what? And, based on the county attorney and attorney general not doing anything, absent a sworn complaint - and I really didn't think there was going to be a sworn complaint - it fell to me. And that's when I began to struggle as to what to do in this case, because I knew if I investigate OV Candidates 2004 and the candidates were elected, that I would be putting myself in jeopardy."

But eventually, he decided it was what needed to be done, and on July 15, he sent a letter to the OV Candidates 2004 primary members, asking them to refile their campaign finance information.

NO PRESSURE

Langlitz said that the day before those letters went out he approached the council members and let them know what his plans were. The reactions were immediate, he said.

"As soon as I told them, they said "Why? Why are you doing this?" Langlitz said, recalling questions that persisted throughout the remainder of his time spent with the town.

Langlitz named three council members who he said threatened his job to his face or to others in the town: Carter, Culver and Dankwerth. All three have denied the allegations.

Dankwerth declined to comment or answer any questions regarding Langlitz for this story, saying she thinks it is in her best interest, upon advice from the acting town attorney, because he town may be sued by Langlitz.

"I would not want to say anything that would hurt the town," she said.

Town staff members who Langlitz said could corroborate his claims all declined to comment for this story, because of possible legal action by Langlitz against the town.

Culver denied any allegations that she threatened Langlitz's position or pressured him to end the OV Candidates 2004 proceedings.

"There was very little communication with him after I was elected. Shortly after I was elected we were told that he had resigned. I had very, very little contact with him," she said.

Langlitz alleges Culver and Dankwerth were the most persistent in their inquiries.

"Conny and Helen were relentless on wanting the status of this, wanting information, (wanting to know) "What is the basis for this?" Helen in particular wanted to know who complained. Helen demanded to know and I told her I was not going to disclose that information." He said the council members were concerned that an investigation into their supporters could "reflect negatively" on them.

Despite the implications, Culver maintains she was not even curious about what was going on with the investigation.

She said she found out about the requests for OV Candidates 2004 to refile "in passing" and had "very little contact" with Langlitz outside council meetings, and never asked him about what was going on with the work.

"Council members have a very full plate; that just wasn't something I really recall discussing. The discussion having to do with the town attorney early on had to do with changing the reporting structure, where it was no longer to the town manager, but to the council. Mark Langlitz made it clear he was unhappy with the idea," Culver said.

Carter also denied any threats, but said he did speak to Langlitz about OV Candidates.

"I never went out and politicked against him, and I will stand up behind that," Carter said. "You will never find a soul in this town that said I wanted to get Mark fired. Nobody.

"I think in the meetings in the town, inside those council meetings, he did a good job to the best of his ability about answering the questions about the law. I think he did an excellent job at that.

"But, after all, when somebody spends $18,000 helping you get elected and they start beating on them you just kind of get a little ill feeling, you know?"

Carter admits he had disagreements about OV Candidates 2004 with Langlitz, but said he did not want to see him lose his job.

"Have you ever had arguments with your dad or your mother? You said things like, 'Why the hell are you making me go to bed?' And as you got bigger, it got harsher. So him and I, on a few things, have had some heated discussions. 'I don't agree with you Mark,' period. 'What the hell are you doing that for?' That was in face-to-face meetings with the man."

He confirmed at least one meeting, with Mayor Paul Loomis, when he told Langlitz he thought he was making a wrong move by investigating the political action committee.

"I told him, 'You're wrong, goddamnit, you're wrong.' If that's abusing him, I abused him," he said.

"I didn't send letters, I didn't fax letters to get him fired, I didn't make speeches about him in my talks to get elected. I don't work that way. If I don't like him, I'll tell you."

Loomis said he does not recall having any conversations with Langlitz and any council member regarding the OV Candidates 2004 issue and did not hear any threats made to Langlitz or know of him being asked to end the investigation.

But some who were not implicated by Langlitz admit they were curious about what was going on with the investigation.

Questions

Terry Parish, who was not supported by OV Candidates 2004, said he asked about the investigation occasionally, because, as a council member, he wanted to know what was happening and be able to answer questions from residents if he was asked.

"I did ask about that every once in a while, to see what was going on. And he kind of told me, you know they were meeting with so and so, meeting with different parties that were involved, and that they were trying to work something out," he said.

While he never asked Langlitz why he was looking into the committee's activities, he said he thinks if anyone had, it would be an appropriate question "because our motivation as to why we do stuff is very important."

Parish said that while there were obvious conflicts between Langlitz and some council members, he never witnessed any of the alleged confrontations.

"My experience with what I observed, I think most of the conflict was personality based," he said. "When I dealt with Mark, before I became a council person and after I became a council person, he was always professional and I often times disagreed with him, which is standard procedure with me, I think, with dealing with any attorney. But, he was always professional with me even when he didn't agree with me. And I never witnessed any of the allegations with him, from later in this, with threats and whatever."

Adler, who at the time had regular contact with some of the council members, said he also did not know of anyone putting pressure on Langlitz to stop his investigation or to leave the position.

"I don't think there is any evidence that Mark was feeling pressure. He denied any pressure, when he left the town," he said. When he announced his resignation, Langlitz was specifically asked by the EXPLORER if he was feeling political pressure to leave Oro Valley, but said his decision was to move on to a "new opportunity."

Adler has always maintained that Langlitz's looking into the committee's affairs was unnecessary.

"He didn't have to pursue us, he chose to. He maintained that it was an ethical consideration, not a legal consideration and he still does. Obviously he made a choice to pursue us, and there was no legal basis for it, as it turns out. We all signed an agreement that said we had done nothing wrong," Adler said. "I don't think that it's easy to point fingers at anybody in any direction because the whole action was initiated on a questionable basis."

He said that despite Langlitz's repeated statements that he was not investigating the candidates themselves, the door was opened by the investigation for him, or anyone else, to take a closer look at the candidates' activities.

If Langlitz's investigation proved OV Candidates 2004 had violated campaign finance laws, and if the committee had been compelled to refile its campaign finance reports, then the council members who were supported by the committee would have had to claim OV Candidates spending on their own reports. Adding the additional money to their reports could have meant that some candidates would have exceeded the amount they were allowed to receive from a single donor under Arizona's campaign finance laws.

"He asked us to refile and the consequences of our refiling, if we had, brought serious implications and liability to the council people," Adler said. "He denied that he had any intention to go after the council people. Nonetheless, if you are talking about lines getting blurred, I think that whether in fact he had any intentions, or somebody else had any intentions, of going after the council people, had we been induced to refile, I think is an open question."

Early on, Langlitz said he complained to Town Prosecutor Tobin Sidles about his decision to investigate the matter.

"The conversation was that he had to do some investigation on the OV Candidates, and my response to him was, look I'm a prosecutor, I do this sort of thing all the time. If you want, I will do that. But he said, no, he has to do it. And I think under that statutes he does, because he is the town attorney," Sidles said.

Langlitz said it was the pressure that he was feeling over this investigation that caused him to accept a position in the county attorney's office last October.

A wish to return

A search of public records shows that Langlitz was feeling out a new position as early as June 15, less than two weeks after the new council members were sworn into office, when he hand delivered an application to the county attorney's office. He did not send letters to OV Candidates 2004 until July 5.

Langlitz said that application was a "feeler" and that he was not the only one in the town with his or her resume out. He said that even before the election rumors were flying that a new council could make a sweep of town management, and he wanted to explore his options just in case.

He was not formally offered a county position until Aug. 27. He accepted it because he said he had heard enough rumors and said council members had expressed enough dissatisfaction with his work, that he was afraid to stick around and risk being fired.

"The county attorney's office was looking for someone, so I explored that," he said. "My thinking was I can't be without a job, I am going to take the job here - you've got AZCOPS saying to get rid of me, I've got K.C. Carter threatening my job Š I've got the council changing the reporting structure (to have him report to the council, not the town manager), I can't take that risk. Did I know what was going to happen? No. The opportunity came up, it was a timing thing."

Martin Bihn, legal counsel for the Arizona Conference of Police and Sheriffs (AZCOPS), released a letter two days after the council elections boasting that the organization had successfully helped to get council members elected who pledged to support a meet and confer ordinance for the town's police department employees. The group had worked with the Oro Valley Police Officers Association to get such an ordinance, but had been told in the past that it was against state law to give one group exclusive bargaining rights. That opinion was given by Langlitz.

Langlitz knew of the letter, and was worried that what it stated would eventually come to pass.

"Realizing that we could be litigating against the town for years, AZCOPS (and) the Oro Valley POA decided to replace the city council in the next election," the letter stated. "This is a fundamental AZCOPS principle - we will try to work with you, if you refuse, we will take you out. Now that we have cleaned house in the Oro Valley town council, the next victims of the AZCOPS "broom" will be the Town Manager and City Attorney."

As Langlitz saw it, political paybacks would be collected sooner or later.

But even though he sought out and accepted a new job, Langlitz said he never emotionally left the town, where he had been happy in his work and had found friends among the staff.

Almost immediately after leaving, he wanted to come back. OV Candidates had been resolved just days after his leaving the town through a settlement agreement. Town Manager Chuck Sweet, who had also come under some public scrutiny with an e-mail circulated by the Sheppards asking for a close evaluation of his performance, had a renewed contract. It seemed some of the "pressure" had subsided.

When Langlitz decided he would try to return to Oro Valley, he did not go directly to the council members, the mayor, or even his former boss, Sweet. Instead, he went to the man he said could be the most helpful in his endeavor -Adler.

"The first person I met with was Bill Adler, because I knew that he would be an instrumental player," Langlitz said. Adler was one of the main contributors to OV Candidates 2004, and a supporter of the new council members, and Langlitz believed he might be able to get those members to hear his case.

Adler agreed to meet with Langlitz, after being asked by a mutual friend, and said it was "a hard request" because he and other members of OV Candidates 2004 had just recently wrapped up the investigation by signing the agreement.

"I told him at the outset that it would be sometime before the resentment that I feel toward him, for the action that he took against me and the cause that I represented, disappeared, but on the other hand, let's see what we may have in common," Adler said.

Langlitz explained his wish to return, and his reasons, and Adler said he advised him to examine his approach if he wished to be successful.

"I indicated to Mark that it isn't his legal mind or his legal qualifications that might interfere with his return, rather perhaps it would be his style, his mannerisms," he said. "I think that a town attorney, particularly dealing with the contentious issues that Oro Valley has to deal with - a community that is trying to balance the conflicts between the need for growth and the need and the desire for preservation - obviously conflicting needs - a town attorney is going to be called upon to take sides, legally. That has to be done in a skillful manner. I advised him that he needed to try to humanize his persona."

At the conclusion of that meeting, Adler agreed to talk with the council members to see if they would be willing to meet with Langlitz.

Adler said at least three council members spoke with Langlitz regarding his interest to return, and that he and Dankwerth met with Langlitz together and had a "cordial" discussion in which Dankwerth promised to give Mark's application the same consideration she would give those of all other applicants. However, things became complicated shortly after that, when a letter outlining that wish was faxed to the county.

"Quite frankly, I was just stunned that that kind of action would be taken against Mark," Adler said. "His personality, his actions quite aside, I don't think that he deserved to have his ability to earn a living undermined. And I was just stunned that would happen."

Langlitz said he wrote the letter after speaking to Parish about a possible return. Parish told him to put it in writing and give it to the council members so they would know his intentions. In the meantime, Langlitz tried to contact other council members to find out if others would at least entertain his request.

Carter agreed to meet with him, briefly at the Oro Valley library.

"I told him I wasn't going to tell him whether or not I would support him coming back but that I would approach him with an open mind. It is his freedom to put in an application for the process," he said. "I told him I didn't agree with some of the lawsuits he was involved with and I was not happy with some of the so-called law cases he used to form his opinions."

Langlitz said he did not hear back from Vice Mayor Gillaspie and could not reach Councilmember Paula Abbott.

One council member he did not initially approach was Culver.

Letter leads to firing

On Nov. 10, Langlitz's letter asking to be reinstated to his former position in Oro Valley was faxed from a machine in town hall to the county attorney's office. On Nov. 12, Langlitz was fired.

When news that the letter was sent to the county became public, several citizens, including Adler and former Vice Mayor Werner Wolff asked that the town find out why it happened. The town investigated it and, according to Loomis, it was determined that the letter had been requested by an investigator at the county. The letter was disclosed because it was deemed a public record. How the county knew the town was in possession of such a letter was not determined by the investigation, Loomis said, and he does not know why it was requested or by whom. Langlitz said the only copies of the letter he distributed were to each of the council members and to Sidles.

The county has refused to say how it obtained the letter and said the fax cover letter was destroyed. It has also declined to comment about the conditions under which Langlitz left his position, saying that it is the policy to confirm only that he did work for the county and no longer does.

Langlitz maintains that the move was one of "retaliation" over OV Candidates 2004, although council members interviewed for this article deny such action.

Culver has made no secret of the fact that she and Langlitz often strongly disagreed over issues facing the council. Evidence of that can be found in the minutes of more than one council meeting. But she said she did not fax the letter to the county, the letter Langlitz said got him fired.

After his resignation, the relationship between the former attorney and council member deteriorated, when Culver said Langlitz made threatening statements to her after one public disagreement.

She filed a police report stating that after a council meeting, Langlitz made the statements "I'll get you," "I”ll be watching you" and "I'm not going away."

No other council member present heard the alleged interaction.

Culver said that when that happened, she no longer wanted Langlitz around and requested that he have no contact with her, or other council members.

Despite those requests, Culver said Langlitz hand delivered his request to return to the town to her office.

After she again complained that she wanted no contact with him, she said he continued to call her office.

"I had reported his threatening me, and yet he continued to contact me," she said. "Yes, it made me very uneasy, it made me very uncomfortable, and I think most people would have been in my position, frankly. He was ignoring requests for no contact."

In response, Langlitz said he was pursuing what he had been encouraged to do by others, to send a letter stating his wish to return to the town. The calls, he said, were follow-ups on the letter.

Langlitz said he was asked by Human Resources Director Jeff Grant to direct any inquiries about the town attorney recruitment process to him, however, Langlitz said he was not trying to find out about the recruitment process, but to get his old job back.

Several e-mail messages obtained through a public records requests show that despite how Langlitz perceived the requests from Grant, Culver had repeatedly asked that he have no contact with the council members, and Grant had relayed that message to Langlitz at least twice.

In a Nov. 5 call to Deputy County Administrator Mike Hein, Culver asked if there was a way to get a psychological evaluation of Langlitz, saying she was afraid he had "gone postal" and accusing him of telephone stalking.

She said she called Hein because he is someone she knows who works for the county who could get the information to the appropriate place. At the time, Langlitz was still a county employee. Culver was reluctant to go into details about the events surrounding Langlitz alleged continued threats, saying the issue could come up in court if the council is sued.

But Langlitz believes she called Hein because she was trying to get him in trouble with his new employer.

"Obviously it's to damage me," he said. "Her first attempt didn't work, when she claimed that I threatened her, then she did this."

Culver said she could not recall exactly how many times he had called her, but that it was "more than once or twice" and that, while she never called him back, the messages he left stated that he wished to talk about getting his job back.

Langlitz insists that he never threatened Culver or any other member of the town council.

"I was leaving, if I wanted to get her, I would have with OV Candidates 2004 - I mean, how am I going to get her and why?" he says now. He believes that the complaints against him are total fabrications, designed to call into question his character. And he believes these moves were successful, as he now is jobless, broke and at quite a new crossroad.

In the coming weeks Langlitz will decide whether to sue the council. He has already directed his lawyer to send a notice of claim to the town, and he says it names Culver specifically for defaming him.

While some questioned for this story were reluctant to speak, because of possible legal action, they believe if the council is sued, a different version of Langlitz's story will surface.

The town council is expected to announce soon a short list of finalists for the town attorney's position. While Langlitz has applied, he is not confident his name will be on the list.

He said he still would like to return to the town, and said his good relationships with many in the town outweigh his past rifts with a few.

He had hoped that because some of the controversies involving him were resolved, he could return.

In a letter to council, written Nov. 5, he summed up his wish to be welcomed back into the Oro Valley fold:

"I do not believe there is any person better suited than I to work with the council to ensure its vision is accomplished. I take great pride in, and will not compromise, my integrity or loyalty. I do not want the council to ever doubt that it will have my complete loyalty and commitment."

Langlitz has already received one rejection from the town of Goodyear, and has begun looking farther and farther away from the beautiful town nestled at the foot of the Catalinas, which he briefly called home, for a new job.

Now, time will tell if this lawyer, with a near-perfect record for giving winning legal advice in Oro Valley, will be as successful for himself.

Langlitz Timeline

May 2003 - Mark Langlitz hired by Oro Valley as the town's attorney

March 9, 2004 - Primary election held to fill five empty seats on the Oro Valley Town Council

April 26, 2004 - Oro Valley notified of an anonymous complaint filed with Phoenix attorney Lisa Hauser, alleging illegal campaign activity by independent expenditure committee OV Candidates 2004, which supported candidates Conny Culver, K.C. Carter, Helen Dankwerth, Richie Feinberg and Barry Gillaspie

April 30, 2004 - Complaint forwarded by Mark Langlitz to the Arizona Attorney General and the office of the Pima County Attorney

May 7, 2004 - County attorney's office declines to take any action regarding the Lisa Hauser letter and anonymous complaint, absent a sworn compliant

May 18, 2004 - Run off election held to elect new council members

June 2, 2004 - New council members K.C. Carter, Conny Culver, Helen Dankwerth, Barry Gillaspie and Terry Parish sworn in at their first council meeting, four of whom were endorsed by OV Candidates 2004

June 15, 2004 - Langlitz hand delivers a job application to Katharina Richter in the county attorney's office

July 5, 2004 - Langlitz sends a letter to OV Candidates 2004 asking the three primary contributors, Bill Adler, Carl Kuehn and Celta Sheppard, to refile their campaign finance information

August 27, 2004 - Langlitz is formally offered a position with the county attorney's office

August 30, 2004 - Langlitz gives his notice of resignation to Oro Valley

Sept. 27, 2004 - Special session of the Oro Valley town council after which Langlitz allegedly threatens councilmember Conny Culver.

Sept. 28, 2004 - Alleged threat incident reported by Culver to Barbara LaWall and Amelia Kramer in the county attorney's office, Attorney General Terry Goddard and Oro Valley Police Chief Daniel Sharp

Sept. 30, 2004 - Police report filed with the Oro Valley Police Department by Culver regarding alleged threat incident

Oct. 1, 2004 - Langlitz's final day with Oro Valley

Oct. 4, 2004 - Langltiz's first day as a lawyer in the civil division of the county attorney's office

Oct. 6, 2004 - Investigation of OV Candidates 2004 ends, with a consent agreement signed by its members admitting no wrongdoing and paying a $5,000 fine.

Throughout late October - Langlitz meets with Bill Adler and Council members Helen Dankwerth and K.C. Carter to discuss a possible return to the town as the attorney. He also has telephone conversations with Councilmember Terry Parish about the same issue.

Nov. 4, 2004 - Conny Culver calls Deputy County Administrator Mike Hein asking for a psychological evaluation of Langlitz and accusing him of telephone stalking a council woman.

Nov. 5, 2004 - A letter is hand delivered from Langlitz to all seven council members asking that he be reinstated as the town attorney during a Nov. 17 executive session.

Nov. 6, 2004 - Culver sends an e-mail to Human Resources Director Jeff Grant, Town Manager Chuck Sweet and Sharp as a reminder that she has asked that Langlitz have "no contact" with council members.

Nov. 8, 2004 - Langlitz hand delivers a second letter to council members, which includes a draft of an employment agreement

Nov. 10, 2004 - Langlitz's letter asking to be reinstated as town attorney is faxed to the county attorney's office from a fax machine in town hall

Nov. 12, 2004 - Langlitz is fired from the county attorney's office

Nov. 17, 2004 - Meeting is held without an agenda item to discuss Langlitz's possible return.

Dec. 6, 2004 - Langlitz sends a letter to acting Town Attorney Tobin Sidles asking to be reinstated to his position and to be reimbursed for lost income.

Dec. 15, 2004 - Langlitz's deadline for asking the council to consider, as an agendized item, his reinstatement to town attorney passes without action. This is also the town's deadline for accepting applications to fill the town attorney's position.

Jan. 28, 2005 - Council meets in executive session to review applications for the town attorney position.