Lynchburg council adopts censure of Councilman Martin Missions after months of complaints

Lynchburg City Council voted 5-2 on Nov. 28 to adopt a resolution censuring Councilman Martin Missions for misconduct and “disorderly behavior,” after months of complaints from fellow council members and public speakers.

The censure motion, introduced during the council’s general business portion of the Nov. 28 meeting, followed a lengthy public-comment period during which multiple residents and community groups called for Missions’s resignation or removal. Vice Mayor Feraldi said the resolution reflected widespread citizen concerns and council members’ calls to address “bad behavior.”

Council members and dozens of citizens described repeated incidents they said were unbecoming of a council member. Public speakers said they had collected signatures for a recall petition, reported intimidation of city employees, and cited social-media posts and private communications they said demonstrated a pattern of harassment and targeting of colleagues and constituents. Michael Bremer (Ward 4) told council he had never seen “such rancor and distrust” in his 35 years observing the council and urged Missions to resign. Kathleen Davis, a city resident, said she was “scared of retaliation” and reported a petition with about 1,700 signatures seeking removal.

Missions disputed some characterizations and said private attempts at reconciliation had been made. He told the council he would be willing to meet one-on-one to discuss concerns: “I would be happy to sit down with you 1 on 1 and discuss these things.” Several council members said they had tried private interventions before bringing a public measure forward.

Members who spoke in favor of the censure said the council has a duty to protect the body’s reputation and to respond when behavior undermines public confidence. Councilwoman Nolan said she could not go anywhere in the city without being asked why the council had not addressed the conduct. Opponents of the censure urged private, Matthew 18–style efforts to resolve disputes, warned the measure would deepen division and political theater, or argued the vote would not address underlying issues.

The measure passed on a council vote recorded as 5 in favor, 2 opposed. The transcript does not record roll-call votes by member name; the council recorded the outcome as “Motion passes 5 2.” The text of the adopted resolution and specific sanctions referenced in it were not read aloud in full during the meeting and are not specified in the transcript.

The censure followed an earlier Nov. 28 procedural motion to amend the evening’s agenda so the matter could be discussed immediately. That initial amendment was contentious, with members objecting to the timing and procedure for adding the matter on short notice.

Public comment at the meeting also included both supporters and opponents of Missions. Several speakers, including representatives of the Lynchburg NAACP and other residents, urged the council to focus on broader community problems—education, homelessness and public safety—rather than internal conflict. Others urged removal or resignation of Missions, citing a list of alleged incidents they said showed a pattern of misconduct.

Council and staff said the body would continue to conduct regular city business; supporters of the censure said they hoped the vote would allow council to move on to policy matters.

The resolution text, any penalties or reporting requirements it imposes, and whether it will be followed by additional personnel or legal actions were not detailed in the meeting transcript.