Possible court challenge looms over decision to restrict Hopewell employees from serving on council

HOPEWELL – City Council took a third and final crack Tuesday at setting policy for future council candidates, and based on citizens’ reactions to it, the only foregone conclusion coming from the action is that the issue is going to wind up in court.

The foundation for possible legal action against the policy had been laid the previous two times it came before council. After Tuesday night, that foundation may have received a fresh layer of cement.

“There has been mentioned about several lawsuits over this ordinance,” Ward 5 resident Ed Houser said before the discussion. “I hope these lawsuits are pursued.”

By a 6-1 vote, council adopted a resolution that lets city employees run for council seats but requires them to resign their employment prior to taking the oath of office. The only difference between that resolution and its earlier incarnations was an effective date of Jan. 1, 2025, rather than taking effect immediately upon passage.

The sponsor of that amendment, Ward 1 Councilor Rita Joyner, said she offered it as a compromise because an immediate enactment would derail current efforts by citizens – including a current city employee – to campaign.

Citizens opposing the measure, however, saw it differently. They are accusing councilors of exerting influence over the upcoming November elections in wards 4, 5 and 6 by blocking some people from running while encouraging others.

They also were upset that originally, the measure on its second reading had been moved to council’s “consent agenda” where uncontested and noncontroversial measures are considered. That changed when Ward 5 Councilor Janice Denton sought and won agreement to move it from the consent to the regular agenda.

“It’s an attempt to interfere with an upcoming election,” Houser, a candidate for the Ward 5 seat, said. “It’s an underhanded attempt to rig an election by our leadership.”

Former Ward 1 Councilor Debbie Randolph, another opponent of the resolution, said she was concerned about the “midstream” perception of the resolution.

“If you want to do this, then do it at a time when people haven’t already decided to run,” Randolph said.

Supporters of the measure say it aligns Hopewell with Virginia state code not permitting municipal employees to serve on council due to conflict of interest. Hopewell’s own code has been silent on that issue and in years past and present, city and school division employees have served on council – including current Ward 6 Councilor Brenda Pelham, who recently retired as a Hopewell school system attendance officer. However, she reported to the school superintendent, not the city manager.

Vice Mayor Jasmine Gore, whose Ward 4 seat is in play this year, is one of the supporters of the resolution. Just as she mentioned in the earlier discussions, Gore maintained this was not an attempt to block anyone from running – it is an effort to prevent conflict of interest by giving existing city employees political and policy power over the city manager, who is one of three direct reports to council.

“The bottom line is that the city manager is responsible for all city employees,” Gore said. “You do not have someone who is a city employee report to the city manager, then also supervise the hire/fire and the evaluating and reprimand of the city manager.”

Related: Hopewell City Council votes to approve accessibility renovations to Westwood Park

A focus on one particular race

The Ward 4 contest appears to be at the heart of the controversy. Ronnie Ellis, a battalion chief in the Hopewell Fire Department, is circulating petitions to run in the ward, possibly against Gore, who has yet to announce re-election plans. She acknowledged Ellis' potential candidacy in her remarks without mentioning him by name.

“If we’re talking about influence, if an employee has this much influence on council members to not want to put something like this in place, just imagine if they are on council as an employee the influence they would have while governing," Gore said.

Later, Gore encouraged those recruiting candidates now on the city payroll to run to “find other candidates” because even if there were no specific city rules, other aspects of Virginia’s conflict-of-interest laws would prevent employees from holding the office.

“If that person wins, that person cannot be an employee and serve on council,” Gore said.

Denton, who is not seeking re-election, said she saw a difference between an employee running for elected office and a city department director or supervisor running. A director reports directly to the city manager while an employee reports directly to the director.

“We’d keep the city manager very busy if every single employee had to go through the city manager,” she said.

Pelham, who also has not announced re-election plans, said having a current employee on council would only cause problems.

“In the daytime, [a city employee] works for that director,” Pelham said. “At night, his employee becomes his supervisor.”

Even though Joyner offered the amendment as a compromise, City Attorney Danielle Smith said anyone running for council now “would be bound by the effective date of Jan.1.

“There would be a conflict there,” Smith said in response to a question raised by Ward 7 Councilor Dominic Holloway.

In the end, the final vote was 6-1. Pelham, who had wanted the resolution to take effect immediately, cast the lone dissenting vote.

Tuesday’s vote came two weeks after council voted 4-3 to pass the resolution on its first reading. Some citizens called the validity of that vote into question because they said it came after Mayor Johnny Partin Jr. declared the meeting adjourned.

Bill Atkinson (he/him/his) is an award-winning journalist who covers breaking news, government and politics. Reach him at batkinson@progress-index.com or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @BAtkinson_PI.

This article originally appeared on The Progress-Index: Hopewell passes law prohibiting city employees from being on council