Rayner et al Tax Vote Dispute Returns to Court

By Valerie Cury

Loudoun County Circuit Court is expected to hear arguments in mid-April in a revived legal challenge filed by Purcellville Town Council members Erin Rayner, Kevin Wright, and Caleb Stought, who are seeking a judicial determination on whether a supermajority vote is required to approve local tax rates.

The case, which is currently scheduled for a hearing around April 15, stems from a dispute over how many votes are needed for the Town Council to adopt or modify tax rates—an issue with significant implications for Purcellville residents as the town approaches fiscal year 2027 budget deliberations.

The three council members initially filed the civil action in October after being on the losing end of a tax-rate vote that passed by a 4-3 majority. The plaintiffs argued that state law requires a two-thirds supermajority for such actions and asked the court to clarify the proper legal standard before future votes occur.

At the time of the disputed vote, then-Town Attorney John Cafferky advised that Virginia law requires a two-thirds vote only to impose a new tax, not to adjust an existing rate—an interpretation consistent with prior legal guidance provided to the town.

In a Jan. 23 hearing, Judge Stephen E. Sincavage dismissed the initial complaint, ruling that it failed to meet the legal threshold for a declaratory judgment. The court found the filing did not sufficiently demonstrate that the plaintiffs’ rights had been denied or infringed.

Representing the town, Robert Sproul argued the court could not retroactively rule on a past vote or issue advisory opinions on hypothetical future actions—positions the court ultimately accepted in sustaining the town’s demurrer.

However, Sincavage granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint, allowing the case to move forward if deficiencies were corrected. The revised filing has now set the stage for the upcoming April hearing.

The three council members are represented by Bryan S. Turner and Sarah Bruns of the Marquis Law Group, a Leesburg-based firm. State Sen. Russet Perry is also a member of the firm and recently sponsored legislation directly affecting the Town of Purcellville.

That legislation, Senate Bill 648, introduces a series of targeted governance and oversight measures applicable only to towns within Planning District 8 with populations between 8,000 and 10,000—criteria that currently apply to Purcellville.

SB 648 includes provisions that would:

• Require the automatic suspension of elected town officials charged with felony offenses, with courts authorized to appoint temporary replacements 
• Mandate a comprehensive, state-directed study of the town’s debt, infrastructure, utilities, and long-term liabilities, to be completed by July 1, 2027 
• Require the town to adopt a remedial plan based on the study’s findings 
• Restrict Town Council voting to items published at least three days in advance, unless altered by a three-fourths supermajority 
• Grant residents expanded legal standing to challenge council decisions, including guaranteed priority court scheduling and potential reimbursement of attorney’s fees 

The legislation is scheduled to sunset on July 1, 2028, approximately one year after the next town election.

Critics have raised concerns that the mandated study could shift accountability for controversial fiscal decisions—such as tax increases or development approvals—onto state-directed recommendations, rather than locally elected officials.

The town already contracts with Davenport & Company for financial advising and Stantec for utility-rate analysis and recommendations.

The overlap between the council members’ legal challenge, their representation by a firm tied to the bill’s sponsor, and the passage of legislation specifically targeting Purcellville introduces a complex intersection of legal and political dynamics.

As the April hearing approaches, the case represents the latest in a series of disputes following the 2024 election, when the three council members bringing the lawsuit lost their governing majority. 

Since that shift, council proceedings have been marked by repeated legal challenges, procedural conflicts, and sharply contested claims surrounding fiscal decisions and council authority, contributing to a period of sustained instability in the town’s governance.