Virginia: in the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VIRGINIA: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND EVAN MORGAN MASSEY and HELEN MARIE TAYLOR, Plaintiffs, v. Case No. LEVAR STONEY, individually and in his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Richmond, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CHRIS A. HILBERT, ANDREAS D. ADDISON, KRISTEN NYE LARSON, CYNTHIA I. NEWBILLE, KIMBERLY B. GRAY, ELLEN F. ROBERTSON, REVA M. TRAMMELL, STEPHANIE A. LYNCH, and MICHAEL J. JONES, in their individual and official capacities, Serve each Defendant at City Attorney, 900 East Broad Street, Suite 400 Richmond, VA 23219 Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiff, by counsel, states the following for his Complaint: 1. This is a proceeding by a resident and taxpayer of the City of Richmond to obtain a declaratory judgment, as well as injunctive relief, against Defendants Levar Stoney, the City Council of the City of Richmond and its nine members, who have violated Article I, § 2 of the Constitution of Virginia, statutes of the Commonwealth, the City Charter issued to the City of Richmond by the General Assembly of Virginia, and provisions of the City’s Zoning Ordinance 1 by ordering, in the case of Mr. Stoney, and agreeing to, in the case of City Council and its members, the removal of monuments protected by §§ 15.2-1812, 15.2-1812.1 and 18.2-137 of the Code of Virginia. 2. This Court has jurisdiction over the matter in controversy pursuant to Va. Code § 17.1- 513. 3. Venue in this Court is proper, pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-261 because the property involved is located in the City of Richmond, where each Defendant has an official office and regularly conducts official duties, and where each Plaintiff resides. 4. Plaintiffs Evan Morgan is a resident and taxpayer of the City who resides on Monument Avenue within the Monument Avenue Historic District. 5. Helen Marie Taylor is a resident and taxpayer of the City of Richmond who resides on Monument Avenue within the Monument Avenue Historic District. For more than fifty years, she has served as President of the Monument Avenue Association, which is dedicated to preserving the historic value of Monument Avenue. She has repeatedly testified at City Council hearings in defense of the historic features of the Monument Avenue Historic District. In recent weeks, she and members of her household have been assaulted and her residence and appurtenances have been vandalized and covered with obscene graffiti by protesters. 6. Defendant Levar Stoney is the Mayor of the City of Richmond, having been elected by the voters of the City in 2016 to serve a four-year term of office. 7. Defendant City Council of the City of Richmond is the governing body of the City. 8. Defendants Chris A. Hilbert, Andreas D. Addison, Kristen Nye Larson, Cynthia I. Newbille, Kimberly B. Gray, Stephanie A. Lynch, and Michael J. Jones are members of City Council who were elected by the voters of their respective election districts. 2 9. Mayor Stoney issued orders and negotiated a contract with a private business entity to remove numerous monuments, most of which had been erected more than a century before, including but not limited to the Stonewall Jackson monument, the Matthew Fontaine Maury monument, the J.E.B. Stuart monument, and the Confederate Soldiers’ and Sailors’ monument. 10. The City Council of the City of Richmond exercises the responsibility and authority to act with respect to all matters within the jurisdiction of the City unless responsibility and authority are specifically delegated elsewhere in the City Charter. Charter of the City of Richmond §§ 2.01 and 4.02. 11. Section 15.2-1401 of the Code of Virginia provides that “all powers granted to localities shall be vested in their respective governing bodies.” 12. Section 2.03(h) of the City Charter provides that the City shall have the power to “control and regulate the use and management of all property of the city, real and personal.” 13. Section 4.02 of the city Charter provides that all powers vested in the City shall be exercised by City council except as otherwise provided in the City Charter. 14. On information and belief, the City Director of Finance has not made the certification required by § 6.20 of the City Charter, which states: Except as otherwise provided in § 13.06 of this charter, no payment shall be made and no obligation incurred by or on behalf of the city or the school board except in accordance with an appropriation duly made and no payment shall be made from or obligation incurred against any allotment or appropriation unless the director of finance or his designee shall first certify that there is a sufficient unexpended and unencumbered balance in such allotment or appropriation to meet the same. Every expenditure or obligation authorized or incurred in violation of the provisions of this charter shall be void. Every payment made in violation of the provisions of this charter shall be deemed illegal and every official who shall knowingly authorize or make such payment or knowingly take part therein and every person who shall knowingly receive such payment or any part thereof shall be jointly and severally liable to the city for the full amount so paid or received. If any officer, member of a board or commission, or employee of the city or of the school board, shall knowingly incur any obligation or shall authorize or make any expenditure in violation of the provisions of this charter or knowingly take part therein such action may be cause for his/her removal. Nothing in this section contained, however, shall prevent the making of contracts of lease or for services providing for the payment of funds at a time beyond the 3 fiscal year in which such contracts are made, provided the nature of such transactions will reasonably require, in the opinion of the council, the making of such contracts. 15. On November 5, 2007, this Court ruled that the order of then-Mayor Douglas Wilder requiring the Richmond School Board to vacate City Hall and remove its records from City Hall was invalid as beyond the powers granted to him as Mayor and that the power to exercise such powers resided in City Council. School Board of the City of Richmond, Deborah Jewell- Sherman, Superintendent, City of Richmond Public Schools, and City Council of the City of Richmond v. L. Douglas Wilder, Mayor of the City of Richmond, and Harry E. Black, 74 Va. Cir. 309, 328 (Nov. 5, 2007). 16. Mayor Stoney has asserted the right to remove the monuments at issue pursuant to Resolution No. 2020-R025, which was adopted by City Council on March 16, 2020, to respond to the Novel Coronavirus pandemic known as “COVID-19.” That resolution constitutes City Council’s purported consent to Mayor Stoney’s declaration that a local emergency exists “due to the potential spread of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus known as ‘COVID-19.’” 17. Removing monuments has no rational relationship to the purpose of Resolution No. 2020-R025, which was a measure designed to protect public health from the effects of a virus. 18. Mayor Stoney’s reliance on the emergency ordinance to justify his removal of the monuments at issue was arbitrary and unjustified. His decision to remove the monuments was based on his political calculation that such an action would benefit his reelection prospects, as he stated at the time the first monument, the Stonewall Jackson monument, was removed. 19. Mayor Stoney had available means to safeguard public safety within the Monument Avenue Historic District and in the locations in which the other monuments were located without removing the monuments at issue. Removal of the statues would not and did not enhance or protect public safety. 4 20. In August 2107, then-Governor Terry McAuliffe took proactive steps to avert violence and to preserve public safety in the area surrounding the Lee monument after an out-of-state organization, had announced that it would sponsor a rally at that monument on September 16, 2017. Mr. McAuliffe signed an Executive Order in August 2017 that banned protests at the Lee monument, prohibited the issuance of permits for demonstrations involving more than ten individuals at that location, and established a task force to draft permanent regulations governing demonstrations. 21. In November 2017, the permanent regulations prohibiting demonstrations at the Lee monument without a permit and limiting the size of permitted demonstrations to 500 people were promulgated. The Lee monument was ordered closed from sunset to sunrise, climbing on the monument was prohibited, and all vehicles, firearms and other weapons, tents and tables, bricks and stones, stick-holding placards, food and beverages, drones, portable and auxiliary lights, and penetrating the ground with any object were also banned. 1VAC30-150. Neither Defendant Stoney nor the state agencies charged with enforcement of those regulations have taken appropriate action to implement those regulations. Indeed, none of the seven general rules prescribed in 1VAC30-150-20 has been complied with in 2020, and the rules applicable to permitted events in 1VAC30-150-30 prohibiting certain activities and items allowed (e.g., weapons, tents, tables, food and beverages, and lights) have been utterly ignored. 22. Defendants exhibited a lack of concern for the safety of protesters and bystanders as the City’s contractor was removing the statue of Stonewall Jackson from its pedestal on July 1, 2020, during a severe storm in which there were reported lightning strikes within one mile of the statue. The standard response to such conditions is to instruct individuals to find appropriate 5 cover.