A circuit court judge rejected a bid to dismiss a whistleblower lawsuit by a former city of Richmond employee, who claims she was wrongfully fired after sharing concerns about transparency law violations.
Connie Clay, the city’s former Freedom of Information Act officer, filed the lawsuit in March 2024 against the city and Petula Burks, the former director of the city’s Office of Strategic Communications and Civic Engagement.
Clay’s lawsuit alleges she was told to withhold information requested through FOIA and was eventually “silenced” before Burks fired her for raising issues with the city’s potential FOIA violations.
In April, the city of Richmond filed a motion to dismiss the case, but after hearing arguments on Jan. 29, Judge Claire G. Cardwell overruled the city’s effort.
“Although Plaintiff's Complaint does not explicitly connect her good faith disclosures of suspected wrongdoing to Defendants’ retaliation and discrimination toward her, the Court may reasonably infer this alleged conduct flowed from her disclosures of suspected FOIA violations,” Cardwell wrote in her Wednesday order.
A city spokesperson declined to discuss the ongoing litigation.
Clay’s attorney told VPM News they “appreciate the Court’s ruling. It is what we anticipated based on the law. We hope this facilitates resolution.”
While employed by the city, Clay was responsible for processing public records requests under FOIA, and faced legal action alleging violations and delays. Burks was her supervisor.
Clay also claimed the city had a “chaotic and mismanaged” FOIA process under Burks. The complaint describes overdue requests and a directive from Burks to tell those seeking documents at the time a response was due that the city would need a seven-day extension, even if requests could be fulfilled earlier.
The lawsuit claims Clay “realized that the City routinely violated its FOIA obligations” and that, as retaliation, she was passed over for a new job and denied funding to attend a legal education course.
During the Jan. 29 hearing, attorneys for the city denied Clay’s allegations and argued they weren’t sufficient to show FOIA law was violated or to establish her as a whistleblower. The attorney for the city also argued that FOIA exemptions are discretionary and that Burks referring to Clay as not being a “good fit” before firing her was not evidence of retaliation.
Cardwell told the city’s attorney he was raising arguments meant for a trial — not for the motion to dismiss on procedural grounds. Cardwell added that being labeled not a “good fit” by an employer could be inferred as meaning someone is not following the status quo of delaying FOIA responses.
