Newnan Council Rejects New Mayor’s City Attorney Nominee

The Newnan City Council voted Tuesday to reject Mayor James Shepherd’s nominee for city attorney, just minutes after Shepherd was sworn into office earlier that day.

Shepherd, who took the oath of office prior to the council meeting, nominated local attorney Vernon M. Strickland to succeed longtime City Attorney Brad Sears, who has served in the role for roughly 40 years and has previously expressed interest in retiring. The nomination marked Shepherd’s first major attempted change as mayor and failed on a 5–2 vote, with Shepherd and Councilmember Cynthia Jenkins voting in favor and Councilmembers Scott Berta, Jim Thomasson, Jen Morrison, Paul Guillaume, and Dustin Koritko voting against it.

Vernon M. Strickland is a partner at Strickland Debrow LLP, a Newnan-based law firm where he practices commercial litigation, employment law, and business law. He earned an undergraduate degree in textile engineering from Georgia Tech and a law degree from Mercer University School of Law, and previously worked at large law firms including Holland & Knight. Strickland is also active in the local business community through leadership and civic involvement.

Strickland acknowledged the nomination and the council’s decision in a brief statement following the vote.

“Whether I’m chosen today or not, it’s an honor to even be considered for this role,” Strickland said.

In a statement posted on social media following the vote, Shepherd said he was disappointed by the council’s decision and raised concerns about the process used in the weeks leading up to it.

“In the days following the election, I met individually with each of the honorable members of City Council to discuss my intentions and to explain why I believed it was time to take a fresh look at Newnan’s legal leadership,” Shepherd wrote. “Our current City Attorney has expressed interest in retirement after serving in the role for 40 years. I believe this transition moment presents an opportunity to bring in the strongest possible candidate to take his place.”

Shepherd said he informed councilmembers ahead of time that Strickland was his likely nominee. After those conversations, the council moved forward with an ordinance changing the process for nominating a city attorney — an action Shepherd said had not occurred in more than four decades.

“At its December 9 meeting, following a series of internal discussions among sitting and incoming Council members, the Council advanced an ordinance that, for the first time in more than 40 years, would limit the Mayor’s nomination role,” Shepherd wrote.

According to Shepherd, the ordinance was justified as a correction to an alleged conflict between the city’s charter and its code of ordinances. Shepherd said he does not believe such a conflict exists and argued that, even if it did, the issue should have been handled differently.

“The rushed process used to push through the new ordinance did not comply with the requirements of our City Charter or Georgia State Law,” Shepherd wrote. “An ordinance that fails to follow mandatory Charter procedures is legally void and unenforceable.”

Shepherd said he raised those concerns with councilmembers prior to the meeting and proposed seeking a declaratory opinion from a judge to determine whether the ordinance is valid. A declaratory opinion is a request for a court’s legal interpretation and does not involve litigation between parties.

“This is not a lawsuit, and not hostile,” Shepherd wrote. “It is simply a request for a legal determination about whether the ordinance is valid.”

The council declined to pursue that option and proceeded with the vote on the city attorney nomination. With the rejection of Strickland’s appointment, Sears remains in the position.

Shepherd also questioned whether the city attorney should have been involved in drafting an ordinance that directly affects the role.

“With the Council rejecting my nominee and retaining a City Attorney who drafted an ordinance that directly benefits him, we now find ourselves in a legal gray area — one that I believe places the city at significant risk,” Shepherd wrote.

Some councilmembers cited the need for a formal vetting process for the city attorney position, according to Shepherd. He said such a process has not previously existed, noting that the city attorney has been reappointed annually for decades.

“Despite never having had a significant vetting process for the City Attorney in 40 years, some council members have decided Newnan needs a formal vetting process for this position,” Shepherd wrote. “That’s fine, and I am willing to work with them on that effort. But it must be clearly defined in the ordinance, consistent with our Charter, and drafted by someone who does not have a personal stake in the outcome.”

Shepherd said he remains committed to working with the council but emphasized the need for clarity moving forward.

“We must move forward with transparency, integrity, and honesty,” Shepherd wrote. “I remain grateful to serve as your Mayor and for the collaboration of the City Council as we navigate these challenges.”

What happens next — including whether the city will seek a judicial opinion on the ordinance or establish a formal vetting process for future nominations — has not yet been determined.