The Battle of Purcellville

By Vice Mayor Carl “Ben” Nett

After a two decade career in national security positions with the Secret Service, the CIA, and the Department of Defense, holding an active TS//SCI security clearance throughout, followed by a second career as a small town cop with the Purcellville Police Department—graduating first in class from the Northern Virginia Criminal Justice Training Academy in December 2022, receiving the Sheriff’s Meritorious Action Award in 2023, and being named Officer of the Year in 2024—I appreciate this opportunity to explain, after so much negative publicity, why I, after winning election to the Purcellville Town Council, was framed with eight sustained administrative charges, Brady listed, fired, indicted, and now decertified.

Did I wake up one morning, take a crazy pill and suddenly decide to betray my own core values and lifetime of public service, or could it be that I am the victim of a weaponized police department working in conjunction with corrupt prosecutors, coordinating closely with opposition Town Council members, to violate my civil rights under color of law in retaliation for my political votes?

I firmly assert the latter, which is why I initiated a meeting with the FBI and why I am urging the Department of Justice to initiate a civil rights investigation into the Purcellville Police Department and the Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office.

In September 2024, Sara Lombrana was hired as Purcellville Deputy Chief of Police—a position I was already campaigning to eliminate as part of a broader plan to restructure the Town of Purcellville government, in general, and the Police Department in particular.

The Deputy Chief of Police position was created in 2017, in response to then Chief Cindy McAlister suing the Town and two of her sergeants. With that lawsuit settled, and all parties having moved on, there was no longer a need for that position.

I likewise noted that the Purcellville Police Department, for years, has failed to provide consistent 24/7 service to residents and businesses, despite public claims to the contrary. I diagnosed the department as being top-heavy, with four command staff being paid six-figure salaries and contributing little to the patrol, investigative, or traffic enforcement missions.

Concurrent with that, an underpaid Officer corps resulted in unsustainable attrition levels. In my view, we were either going to have a fully functioning police department or transfer full-time policing services to the Sheriff’s Office.

Since announcing my candidacy for Town Council, as a police officer, exercising my rights under Virginia law, I became the immediate target of workplace harassment and intimidation efforts, to include the opposing candidates’ political signs being placed within the landscaping of the Purcellville Police Department headquarters, where I reported for duty each workday.

Police department leadership made no effort to have those political signs removed, despite complaints from numerous citizens—some of whom, ironically, thought the police department was publicly endorsing the police officer running for Town Council, me. They weren’t.

To the contrary, I was victim of workplace targeting to include a series of personnel actions, in rapid succession, based solely on my lawful political activity. These included sustained Internal Affairs charges by Deputy Chief Lombrana, her subjecting me to a “random” drug test on election eve, and even threatening me with termination for passing out “Junior Purcellville Police Officer” stickers to children while campaigning for office off duty—stickers provided to me, unsolicited, by a Purcellville Police Sergeant for handout as part of ongoing community engagement efforts.

On November 19, 2024, two weeks after my election victory, Human Resources Director LaDonna Snellbaker sent me an email demanding my resignation from either the Purcellville Town Council or the Purcellville Police Department, citing Section 10.3.B.1 of the Town of Purcellville Employee Handbook, which states: “No employee shall continue in their position with the Town after election to any public office in the Town.”

This change, unbeknownst to me, had been made to the Town of Purcellville Employee Handbook during a July 2024 revision. The previous version of the Town of Purcellville Employee Handbook was dated 19 years before, in 2005, and it did not contain any such provision.

The timing of this unannounced change to the Town of Purcellville Employee Handbook, only 4 months before election day in November of 2024, and the unexplained reason for the change, are inherently suspicious.

On November 25th, 2024, the Executive Director of the Virginia Conflict of Interest and Ethics Advisory Council, Stewart Petoe, affirmed that I could exercise my legal right to hold elected office under Virginia state law, specifically referencing Virginia Code §2.2-3107 (B) (1) (ii), noting, “It is quite clear, and applies to your situation.  It is permissible for you, under COIA, to remain a member of the town police department and take your seat on the town council.”

The offending provision of the employee handbook, contrary to state law, was subsequently removed.

The political targeting that I experienced as both a candidate for Town Council and Councilman-elect, continued after my taking office in January 2025. Based on two events—my participation in a brief agenda work session at Town Hall at the direction of the Town Manager, while on duty and remaining in service and responsive to calls, and my attendance at a conference in Richmond while on sick leave due in part to an injured knee that prevented me from driving an automobile.

Ms. Lombrana initiated two more Internal Affairs investigations resulting in eight sustained charges and my being placed on the Loudoun County Brady/Giglio List by Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney Bob Anderson. Mr. Anderson placed me on the Brady list for non-Brady offenses—minor, disputed alleged administrative violations, and he did so two days prior to the deadline for me to contest the charges (which I did) pursuant to the Law Enforcement Officer’s Procedural Guarantee Act, effectively denying me due process.

Mr. Anderon’s premature decision was timed for maximum political effect—publicly released in advance of the February 25, 2025 Town Council meeting, so that I could be publicly mocked for being Brady listed.

Concurrent with this, the details from my confidential Purcellville Police Department Internal Affairs investigation were leaked to the media in violation of Virginia Code §2.2-3706. Attorney General Jason Miyares has been asked to investigate this criminal violation, thus far with no response.

I appealed my unlawful termination pursuant to the Town’s Grievance Policy and, on June 25, 2025, I attended a hearing alongside my attorney. The Town was represented by an HR attorney contracted to defend my termination, Robert Sproul, who is now the Town Attorney.

Per the Town’s grievance policy, devised and executed by Mr. Sproul and monitored by then Town Attorney John Cafferky, I, as the grievant, chose one of the panel members. I did not choose a campaign donor, or a family member, or a personal friend. I chose an attorney, a member of my neighborhood HOA, who I knew would be fair and impartial and who I knew would act ethically, and who I knew had the intellectual substance to discern fact from fiction.

The Town chose one of the panel members. The Town’s choice of panel member was approved by the attorney representing the Town to ensure impartiality. Those two panel members then chose the third and final member. Two of the three panel members were complete strangers to me and are not Town of Purcellville residents.

As you will read in the unanimous decision of the Grievance Panel, dated June 28, 2025, my termination from the Purcellville Police Department was not rooted in any lawful misconduct or policy violation. Instead, the evidence strongly suggests a coordinated political hit job—one, I believe, led by Councilwoman Erin Rayner—to eliminate a political rival and ultimately reclaim a voting majority on the Town Council.

“No allegation made by the Town in writing or otherwise is supported by the evidence,” wrote the Panel. To the contrary, the Panel concluded that Interim Chief Sara Lombrana and Lieutenant Mike Holman committed “serious violations” of both the Employee Handbook and the police department’s General Orders.

In sworn testimony, Interim Chief Lombrana admitted that politics were involved in my termination and, stunningly, failed to produce any report from the Prince William County Police Department regarding the investigation they were asked to jointly lead, while further admitting that she first approached the Fairfax Police Chief, who declined to conduct the investigation into me “because of its clear political nature.”

Based on a flawed, targeted, and underdeveloped internal investigation report, Chief Lombrana testified that she informed Bob Anderson’s office of the allegations against me “before any adjudicatory body had an opportunity to determine the veracity of the allegations. The Panel finds that there would be no reason for Ms. Lombrana to inform Mr. Anderson’s office about the allegations at this time except that she wanted Mr. Nett to be on the Brady List.”

Despite alleged truthfulness violations on my part, Acting Chief Lombrana was unable to cite specific instances in which I allegedly lied. “I don’t have any,” she admitted, under oath. The Town’s counsel stipulated during the Hearing that Councilwoman Erin Rayner was the sole source for the Prince William IA investigation’s determination that I was not sick while in Richmond.

Councilwoman Erin Rayner corroborated that she had been the former campaign manager for Nicole Wittmann, the current Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney in Bob Anderson’s office, further underscoring the political entanglements surrounding the investigation.

The Panel continued: “Mr. Nett was terminated and placed on the Brady List for minor, disputed alleged violations. The actions taken against Mr. Nett have serious, life-long implications for him and his family. At the same time, supervisors in the Purcellville Police Department display insubordination to superiors and ignore important disciplinary regulations … Interim Chief Lombrana displayed the worst type of leadership—one set of rules for rank and file officers and a different set of rules for higher ranking supervisors …

“The Panel has determined that Mr. Nett was truthful and justified in taking all of the actions alleged in Mr. Anderson’s February 24, 2025 Brady List letter … 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 ordered that I be reinstated to the Purcellville Police Department with full back pay and benefits and payment of attorney fees. On July 10, 2025, pursuant to the Town’s Grievance policy, and owing to Town Manager Fraser’s conflict due to his being called as a witness in the case, the unanimous decision of the Grievance Panel was forwarded to the Chief Judge of Loudoun Circuit Court for implementation.

On Monday, October 27, 2025, four months after the Grievance Panel Decision, the Chief Judge of Loudoun Circuit Court, Judge Fleming, issued an order stating that he didn’t have jurisdiction in the matter and punted it back to the Town.

I make no judgment on that. I’m not an attorney. What I can assert is that on October 24, 2025, while this matter was being heard, I observed the courtroom presence of Mike Cox, Bob Anderson’s investigator, staring down the judge from the back of the courtroom.

Following the Judge’s dismissal of the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the Grievance Panel Decision was placed in the hands of Purcellville’s Acting Town Manager, Diana Hays, whose commentary and actions since January 2025 clearly indicate she is a political adversary.

Her sole authority and responsibility was to determine whether the relief ordered by the panel—reinstatement with back pay and benefits and payment of reasonable attorney fees—is consistent with written policy. It clearly is. Her function in this matter is purely ministerial.

Diana Hays was advised by the Town’s Attorney of record and the incoming Town Attorney, who, by the way, was approved by unanimous vote of the Town Council, to confirm that the relief ordered by the Panel is consistent with the Town’s Grievance Policy and formally implement the order. She was reportedly told the same thing by an attorney with VRSA, the Town’s insurance carrier. Yet, she continued to take no action—even beyond week two.

At the November 12, 2025, Town Council meeting, the Council majority appointed a new Interim Town Manager, Mr. Tony Sabio—an individual recommended by several current and former federal law enforcement Agents, and who I know from the Secret Service Academy. The political opposition focused on the Grievance Panel Decision—claiming we installed a friend of mine to give me back my job. That is demonstrably false for two reasons.

First, there is nothing to give me. The unanimous Decision of the Grievance Panel is a final order that no Town Manager, whether friend or foe, no judge, no elected official can overturn by substituting his or her judgment for that of the Grievance Panel.

Second, if we wanted Mr. Sabio to be the one to implement the Grievance Panel Decision, then we would have appointed him as Interim Town Manger effective that night, immediately stripping Diana Hays of all authority. We very deliberately did not do that. Instead, we appointed Mr. Sabio as Interim Town Manager effective Friday, November 14, 2025—two days later.

Then, in a vote I recused myself from, a motion was made to have the Town Council direct still Acting Town Manager Diana Hays to either implement the Decision of the Grievance Panel or notify Town Council of her refusal to do so by Thursday, November 13, 2025.

That motion failed 3-3, as I predicted it would, because Councilmembers Caleb Stought, Erin Rayner, and Kevin Wright voted against the motion to direct Diana Hays to take some action, after sitting on this for now 2 ½ weeks, reportedly ignoring advice from three attorneys who don’t represent my interests, but rather those of the Town.

The very next day, as I also predicted would happen, still Acting Town Manager Diana Hays—after sitting on the Grievance Panel Decision for 2 ½ weeks, refusing to perform her ministerial duties contrary to advice and counsel reportedly given her by numerous attorneys, decided to recuse herself from the matter, transmitting notice of same to Commonwealth Attorney Bob Anderson, via email at 1:39 p.m. on November 13, 2025, putting this matter before his office.

This, despite the Town Attorney asserting that Ms. Hays, in his judgment, did not have a conflict of interest and despite Ms. Hays previously asserting to the Town Attorney that she did not have a conflict of interest and could decide the matter fairly.

Bob Anderson, however, has a direct personal involvement in the matters giving rise to the grievance. On November 17, 2025, he referred the matter to Eric Olsen, his buddy, the individual prosecuting me in retaliation for having been fully exonerated by that same Grievance Panel Decision (The subpoenas for the Grand Jury were signed the very next business day following the issuance of the unanimous decision of the Grievance Panel).

On November 24, 2025, Mr. Olsen, ignoring his own conflict of interest, provided an analysis that consisted entirely of issues not within the scope of his assigned review, finding fault with the Town’s Grievance Process—a grievance process that was devised and overseen by the HR Attorney, now the Town Attorney.

Bob Anderson, in recusing himself, should have referred the Grievance Panel Decision to a neutral and detached third-party. But, as the Panel’s decision is devastating to him personally, he tried to put the fix in—by giving it to his good buddy, Eric Olsen.

Mr. Olsen, given his own conflict of interest, could have and should have recused himself from the matter, but he didn’t. And then, because he has no authority to overturn the finding of the Grievance Panel, and because the Grievance Panel decision is, again, devastating to his friend, Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney Bob Anderson, and because the Grievance Panel decision and the irrefutable evidence upon which that decision is based is further devasting to the credibility of many of the witnesses Eric Olsen relied on for the Grand Jury, and because the only answer to the only question before Eric Olsen—the question of whether the relief granted by the Grievance Panel is consistent with the Town’s written policy—is “yes,” Eric Olsen avoided the question entirely and redefined his role, claiming that the Town’s Grievance Policy was flawed. His unsolicited and unpermitted attack on the Panel decision itself was invalid.

Eric Olsen’s invalid legal opinion placed the Grievance Panel Decision back before the Town. Under Virginia law, “the decision of the Panel or hearing officer shall be final and binding” and the only point at issue is whether the Panel ordered the proper relief.

Mr. Olsen did not answer that question, because the answer is “yes.” He doesn’t want to say yes because he is not a neutral and detached third party. He is a party to the conspiracy to deprive me of my civil rights under color of law.

So, as part of the ongoing attempt to pre-empt official implementation of that Grievance Panel Order, Sara Lombrana lobbied to have me decertified as a law enforcement officer. In a letter dated December 2, 2025, the Department of Criminal Justice Services informed me of my decertification, based solely on the issues surrounding my termination and Brady listing—all of which were determined to be unfounded by the unanimous decision of the Grievance Panel, following a full day evidentiary hearing.

That decertification is being appealed, with DCJS now being fully apprised of Ms. Lombrana’s history.

Sara Lombrana, feigning innocence and surprise, provided this two-page decertification letter from DCJS to the Interim Town Manager. What she didn’t provide him was the accompanying DCJS file, which includes months of correspondence between Lombrana and her DCJS point of contact.

In her email of July 24, 2025, to Jonathan D. Banberger, the law Enforcement Decertification Coordinator/Division of Law Enforcement, Ms. Lombrana writes: “Jon. The decision was submitted to the Court for its consideration on July 9 th , and we have not yet received a ruling.

Regardless, we will not have a Brady officer in our ranks. And the decision is as it stands and will not be reversed. I hope this helps. Sara.”

Thus, Ms. Lombrana asserted, in writing, that her word is final – due process being of no consequence.

More recently, on November 25, 2025, Ms. Lombrana wrote to Mr. Banberger: “Jonathan, I have attached the court’s decision for Carl Nett’s case. Mr. Nett will not be reinstated. Thank you.”

What Ms. Lombrana was actually referencing, in that November 25 email, was the Letter of Opinion from Eric Olsen, issued the previous day, November 24, and which is just that—a letter of opinion that, as noted, is a nullity as Mr. Olsen exceeded the scope of his review, and the Grievance Panel Decision does in fact stand.

Acting Chief Lombrana never included the Purcellville Town Manager or Town Attorney in any of her correspondence with DCJS, because her communications include outright falsehoods, gross misrepresentations, and serious omissions.

Ms. Lombrana’s actions with regard to communications with DCJS are a repeat of her unauthorized out-sourcing of Internal Affairs investigations into me back in February 2025 and her premature and unilateral communications with Commonwealth’s Attorney Bob Anderson—all demonstrating a disregard for her chain-of-command and her defiance of lawful authority. As Yogi Berra said, “It’s Déjà vu all over again.”

Amidst all the political nastiness, I ask my fellow citizens to please understand and never lose sight of this underlying truth: Had I not been elected to public office, exercising my rights under Virginia Law to participate in local governance, as a first responder, campaigning on a public pledge to reduce utility rates, oppose annexations into the town for commercial and industrial development, and streamline local government, to include the Police Department, then I would not have been framed and fired by the Police Department.

Had I not contested my unlawful termination from the Purcellville Police Department, and prevailed, and had Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Bob Anderson’s efforts to violate my civil rights not been exposed and subsequently rebuked by the unanimous finding of an independent panel, then I would not have been criminally indicted and subjected to this ongoing legal dispute over implementation of the Grievance Panel Decision and Order—which, again, is personally and professionally devastating to individuals in the Purcellville Police Department, the Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office, and beyond.

For these reasons, I again appeal to the U.S. Department of Justice to initiate a formal civil rights investigation into the Purcellville Police Department, the Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office, and the Purcellville Town Government as a whole, to include petitioning a federal court for access to the Grand Jury transcripts which, I believe, indicate a lack of probable cause to support any of the charges against me—further indicating a weaponization of the criminal justice apparatus for purely political purposes.