Court finds it has no jurisdiction in Purcellville Grievance Panel case
By Valerie Cury
Chief Judge Douglas L. Fleming Jr. ruled late Monday afternoon that he does not have jurisdiction to determine whether the Town of Purcellville followed its Employee Grievance Panel process in the case of former police officer Nett—leaving the next steps unclear despite the Town’s own policy stating that the Chief Judge should decide in such circumstances.
On Friday, Oct. 24, Judge Fleming said he would issue a letter of opinion on Oct. 27 addressing whether the Town of Purcellville properly followed its Employee Grievance Panel process in Nett’s case. He added that he would work on the opinion over the weekend.
The Town of Purcellville’s counsel petitioned the Chief Judge of the Loudoun County Circuit Court to determine whether the relief granted by the Panel complies with the Town’s written policy. Nett, who was a Purcellville police officer, was relieved of duty on April 4 and later filed a grievance challenging his dismissal under the Town’s Employee Handbook.
“The question of whether the relief granted by a panel is consistent with the written policy shall be determined by the Town Manager or their designee, unless the Town Manager or their designee has a direct personal involvement with the event (s) giving rise to the grievance. In that case, the decision shall be made by the Chief Judge of the Loudoun County Circuit Court,” according to the Town’s petition for judicial review to confirm that the grievance process was properly followed.
In other words, because the Town Manager was involved in Nett’s case, the Chief Judge is responsible for deciding whether the panel’s relief aligns with Town policy.
The Panel was comprised of three members: Nett selected an attorney, the Town Manager chose a PhD, and the third panelist was jointly selected by the other two.
On June 28, the Grievance Panel found Nett innocent of all five allegations, citing the “greater weight of the evidence” as the basis for its decision.
The Panel noted that the Town “went so far as to suggest that Mr. Nett should be terminated for emailing, rather than calling, his supervisor,” referring to a November 26, 2024 memorandum circulated by Lt. Michael Holman. The Panel said that memo “does not appear in the Department General Orders, the Handbook, or elsewhere as a formal requirement.”
The Town failed to provide any report from the Prince William Police Department regarding its investigation into the allegations, nor did it present any witnesses from the department to testify before the Grievance Panel about the inquiry into whether Nett was ill—a central charge that allegedly prevented him from performing his duties.
Investigators from Prince William County didn’t interview anyone who spent considerable time with Nett at the Jan. 29–30 conference, except for his political opponent, Council Member Erin Rayner, who said she was with him for about five minutes. “The Panel finds that the greater weight of the evidence shows that Mr. Nett was, in fact, sick and unable to perform his duties as a police officer on Jan. 29–30,” according to the Panel.
Acting Chief Sara Lombrana also improperly opened an internal affairs investigation with Prince William County without authorization from her supervisor. Lombrana dismissed the requirement under Police General Orders that she obey her supervisor’s instructions, saying, “I didn’t feel that I should.” According to the Panel, “Chief Lombrana’s cavalier refusal to follow the orders of the Town Manager constitutes, at least, continued and ongoing insubordination and should be of grave concern to Town residents.”
The Commonwealth’s Attorney placed Nett on the Brady List; however, the Employee Grievance Panel concluded that “it is clear to this Panel that Mr. Nett was not guilty of any malfeasance in connection with the events listed in Mr. Anderson’s Brady List letter.”
The Panel further found that Acting Chief Lombrana and Lt. Holman “demonstrated that they failed to follow the progressive and proportionate disciplinary requirements in violation of both the Handbook and the General Orders.”
Comments
Any name-calling and profanity will be taken off. The webmaster reserves the right to remove any offensive posts.
