Belyea v. The City of Glen Cove

• Decision Date: 22 August 2022
• Docket Number: 20-CV-5675 (MKB)
• Parties: DARCY BELYEA, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF GLEN COVE and TIMOTHY TENKE in his individual and official capacities, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

DARCY BELYEA, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF GLEN COVE and TIMOTHY TENKE in his individual and official capacities, Defendants.

No. 20-CV-5675 (MKB)

United States District Court, E.D. New York

August 22, 2022

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

MARGO K. BRODIE, United States District Judge:

I. Background ............................................ 3

a. The parties ............................................ 3

b Plaintiff's early employment with the City ............................................ 3

c. 2018 actions alleged by Plaintiff ............................................ 4

d. 2019 actions alleged by Plaintiff ............................................ 6

e. 2020 actions alleged by Plaintiff............................................ 8

II. Discussion ............................................ 10

a. Standard of review ............................................ 10

b. Consideration of documents other than the Complaint ............................................ 10

c. Title VII claims against the City ............................................ 15

i. Timeliness ............................................ 15

ii. Exhaustion of administrative remedies ............................................ 18

iii. Hostile work environment claim ............................................ 22

iv. Retaliation ............................................ 25

1. Participation in a protected activity ............................................ 28

2. Adverse employment action ............................................ 29

3. Causal connection between protected activity and adverse employment actions ............................................ 31

d. NYSHRL hostile work environment and retaliation claims against Tenke ............................................ 35

e. Section 1983 claims against both Defendants ........................................... 37

i. Tenke's claims of legislative and qualified immunity ............................................ 38

1. Legislative immunity ............................................ 38

2. Qualified immunity............................................ 42

ii. Personal involvement of Tenke ............................................ 44

iii. First Amendment claims against Tenke and the City ............................................ 47

1. First Amendment retaliation claim on the basis of Plaintiff's gender discrimination complaint............................................ 49

A. Plaintiff sufficiently alleges that she engaged in protected speech when she issued a press release ............................................ 49

(1) Plaintiff's internal complaint ............................................ 50

(2) Plaintiff's press release ............................................ 51

1. Plaintiff plausibly spoke as a citizen ............................................ 51

2. Plaintiff spoke on a matter of public concern............................................ 52

B. Plaintiff alleges that she suffered adverse employment actions............................................ 54

C. Plaintiff sufficiently alleges causation ............................................ 56

2. First Amendment political retaliation........................................... 58

iv. Fourteenth Amendment claims ............................................ 62

v. The City's Monell liability ............................................ 63

f. Punitive damages ............................................ 68

III. Conclusion ............................................ 69

Plaintiff Darcy Belyea commenced the above-captioned action on November 20, 2020, (Compl., Docket Entry No. 1), against Defendants the City of Glen Cove (the “City”) and Timothy Tenke, in his individual and official capacities as the mayor of Glen Cove. Plaintiff alleges claims of gender discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment and free speech violations pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et seq. (“NYSHRL”), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, based on her workplace environment and her termination as Recreation Director from the City during Tenke's tenure as mayor. (Id. ¶¶ 10, 26, 115-27.)

The City and Tenke separately move to dismiss the claims against them pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.^[1] Plaintiff opposes the motions.^[2] For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part Defendants' motions to dismiss.

I. Background

The Court assumes the truth of the factual allegations in the Complaint for the purposes of this Memorandum and Order.

a. The parties

Plaintiff is a female residing in Glen Cove in Nassau County, New York. (Compl. ¶ 6.) The City employs hundreds of employees and operates approximately nineteen departments to administer the city government. (Id. ¶ 8.) Tenke, a Democrat, is the mayor and chief executive officer and a resident of Nassau County. (Id. ¶¶ 9, 27.)

b. Plaintiff's early employment with the City

The City hired Plaintiff as the Recreation Director in November of 1996, and Plaintiff began her first day of work on January 2, 1997. (Id. ¶¶ 10-11.) Recreation Director is a civil service position, subject to the rules and requirements of New York's Civil Service laws and regulations. (Id. ¶ 12.) The Recreation Director position is not appointed annually, unlike some other department head positions, and “exercises general supervision over” and has responsibility for the City's recreational areas, playgrounds, and programs, including City recreational events. (Id. ¶¶ 15-16.) Plaintiff is a member of the collective bargaining unit, identified as “CSEA.” (Id. ¶ 17.) After a brief period of probation, Plaintiff became a permanent employee, and the position was then “controlled by N.Y. Civil Service Law § 75 (‘Section 75').” (Id. ¶ 13.) Section 75 prohibits the City from terminating an employee without first issuing charges and then providing a hearing on the charges, with some exceptions. (Id. ¶ 14.)

For the first twenty-one years of her employment, Plaintiff performed her job “in an exemplary manner.” (Id. ¶ 18.) Plaintiff was “not disciplined or reprimanded, and her personnel record [was] unblemished.” (Id. ¶ 19.) From 1997 to 2017, Plaintiff worked “successfully” with four different administrations from both major political parties. (Id. ¶ 20.) Residents have “lauded” her work performance. (Id. ¶¶ 22-23.)

In January of 2016, the CSEA instructed then-mayor Reginald Spinello to remove Plaintiff as a dues-paying member of the CSEA. (Id. ¶ 24.) Spinello declined to take action because he believed the issue “was really between [Plaintiff] and the union.” (Id. ¶ 25.)

Plaintiff's work conditions “changed for the worse” “[a]lmost immediately” after Tenke took office as mayor in January of 2018 and City officials worked to undermine and circumvent her. (Id. ¶¶ 28-29.) For example, that month, Tenke and the deputy mayor, Maureen Basdavanos, sought to amend parking regulations at the City stadium parking lot, and although Plaintiff “should have been involved in such discussions,” Tenke and Basdavanos excluded her. (Id. ¶¶ 30-31.)

c. 2018 actions alleged by Plaintiff

In February of 2018, a “close friend and ally of Tenke,” Michael Cervini, began a “campaign of disinformation about [Plaintiff]'s work leading the renovation of the City's batting cages.” (Id. ¶ 32.) Cervini publicly criticized Plaintiff's work but praised the mayor, including in a full-page advertisement in the local newspaper. (Id. ¶ 34.) Plaintiff asked Tenke to confront Cervini, but the conduct did not stop.^[3] (Id. ¶ 36.)

At a City Council meeting in July of 2018, Basdavanos' husband accused Plaintiff of not caring about the safety of residents and stated that she should be fired because she did not staff “sufficient lifeguards” for the beaches. (Id. ¶ 38.) At that time, there was an ongoing national lifeguard shortage, which was affecting municipalities across Long Island. (Id. ¶ 39.)

That summer, a citizen requested documents concerning bathroom renovations being supervised by Plaintiff pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”). (Id. ¶ 40.) Instead of “allowing the FOIL request to proceed in the normal course,” Basdavanos sent the documents directly to the resident, who used these documents “to allege that [Plaintiff] should be fired for mismanaging the project.” (Id. ¶ 41.) Plaintiff contends that the project was “doomed” because of a defunct outside contractor, and that although she had sought assistance from Tenke, the city attorney, and the building department to force the contractor's hand in completing the work, they took no action, leaving Plaintiff to “take the blame for the contractor's failures.” (Id. ¶¶ 42-43.)

Plaintiff contends that these issues were directed at her based on her gender, because “historically,” the mayor supported male employees and would “maintain order at meetings and other events” when residents criticized these employees but did not do the same for Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 45.) In addition, male employees were not reprimanded or criticized for serious misconduct, while Defendants “tacitly condoned and/or provoked” residents' unwarranted criticisms of Plaintiff. (Id.) Examples of male employees receiving better treatment included a male employee causing the City to spend more than half a million dollars in health insurance premiums for retirees not entitled to receive these benefits and not being reprimanded, and a male employee not being reprimanded or disciplined for unlawfully switching license plates on City vehicles, one of which was used for non-work-related purposes and involved in an accident....