Calling it “political disagreement, not actionable misconduct,” the attorney for Hopewell Vice Mayor Rita Joyner has asked a federal court to throw out former Hopewell City Manager Concetta Manker’s almost $7 million wrongful termination lawsuit against Joyner.
The paperwork was filed Aug. 8 in U.S. District Court in Richmond at the same time that the city of Hopewell filed its own motions to dismiss the suit. Manker, who was fired May 1 along with City Clerk Brittani Williams, filed the suit July 7 and is asking for a total of $6.85 million in damages, including punitive damages against Joyner, Mayor Johnny Partin Jr., and councilors Ronnie Ellis of Ward 4 and Susan Daye of Ward 5.
Manker
Manker accuses Joyner of racism, citing several examples where the vice mayor reportedly said that Manker, who is Black, was “Blacking up the city” by hiring people of color as major department heads. She also claims Joyner defamed her by calling her “incompetent” in a 2024 email and stating that she hoped to get enough votes from the results of that November’s election to have Manker fired.
All four councilors who voted to fire Manker are White. Because Joyner was singled out for more than the others, she had to hire her own attorney and file a separate response.
Joyner is represented by Virginia Beach-based attorney Anne Lahren.
More: Judge continues Hopewell treasurer’s case after her attorney asks to withdraw
Vice mayor acted within ‘authority’
In the lawsuit, Manker cited Joyner for racism, defamation and blocking due process. In her response, Joyner’s attorney said the vice mayor was acting totally within her authority as a Hopewell elected official and as one of seven people to whom the city manager is directly accountable.
“Joyner exercised her authority as an elected official to criticize Plaintiff’s performance and advocate for a change in leadership consistent with the will of the voters,” the response stated. “Plaintiff repeatedly characterizes Joyner’s conduct as ‘thwarting’ her initiatives, opposing her policies, and expressing negative views about her job performance. These allegations, even if true, reflect political disagreement, not actionable misconduct.”
Joyner
None of Manker’s allegations are “a matter of law,” the response said.
“The Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to establish racial animus, deprivation of a protected property or liberty interest, or actionable defamatory statements,” it read. “Moreover, Joyner’s actions as an elected official – expressing criticism, participating in governance decisions, and communicating with constituents and the press about matters of public concern – are fully protected under both constitutional and state law doctrines, including qualified immunity and the First Amendment.”
Because Manker’s allegations represent “disagreement with the political and policy choices of the City’s duly elected leadership, rather than any legally cognizable wrongdoing,” the suit should be dismissed, according to the response.
More: ‘Sad and difficult case’: First of 3 suspects in Hopewell child’s shooting death sentenced
Mirrors Hopewell’s response
Joyner’s response jibes with the official position of Hopewell in the case. That response, filed by City Attorney Anthony Bessette, calls the allegations “nothing more than legal conclusions, or where the allegations permit a court to infer no more than a possibility of misconduct.
It stated that Manker was terminated because she “was not performing at a level that met the City’s legitimate expectations.” As for the claims of racism, the city’s response called them “flimsy.
“The race of the decision makers does not give rise to an inference of discrimination,” it read. “This is particularly true where the same four councilors who voted to terminate Dr. Manker’s employment voted to hire Michael Rogers, an African American male, to be the Interim City Manager. Because Dr. Manker was not replaced by someone outside of her protected class, there is no inference of race discrimination.”
While the lawsuit alleges that Ellis blew “a racist dog whistle” when he circulated campaign flyers saying it was time “to take back our city,” it also claimed he improperly made the motion to reconsider a February vote to terminate Manker because he walked out of the meeting. Ellis is a battalion chief with the Hopewell Fire Department, and in that position, Manker claimed he directly reported to her; therefore, his motion was a violation of conflict-of-interest.
Hopewell claims that Manker’s termination was permissible because her contract was not originally in violation of the act. Virginia’s Conflict-of-Interest Act [COIA] states that only contracts and purchases that run afoul of COIA can only be voided, and it is silent on any other legal transactions.
“The termination of Dr. Manker’s contract is neither a contract nor a purchase made in violation of COIA,” the city’s response said. “Therefore, even if the vote violated COIA, the vote is not void or voidable.”
No dates have been set for preliminary hearings on the lawsuit.
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 officials respond to former city manager’s federal lawsuit