Ward A At-Large Councilmember Japera Hemming Criticized And Accused Of Abusing Power Over Ethics Board Appointment Controversy; Residents Demand Appointee Resign; Council Set To Discuss Ethics Board Appointments At Monday Meeting

Open records initially obtained by local citizens advocacy group, The Georgia Accountability Project, and subsequently obtained by The East Point News, raise ethical concerns about Ward A At-Large Councilmember Japera Hemming, who sidestepped the advisement of the City Attorney in order to appoint a local resident to the city’s Ethics Board–and then appeared to wield pressure on city employees in order to cajole them into moving at a pace Hemming demanded.

Hemming’s decision to bypass the city’s top legal expert and Hemming’s actions surrounding the appointment have now exposed Hemming, who only took office in January, to broad criticism, scrutiny, and accusations of abusing her power.

Several residents have promised to file ethics complaints against Hemming that could create legal complications for her.

It all started when Hemming sought to appoint Ward C resident Jeremy Taylor to the City’s Ethics Board, even though City Attorney L’Erin Wiggins offered her opinion that Taylor was ineligible to serve based on the timing and status of ethics complaints Taylor had previously filed against two former Councilmembers, in addition to Wiggins’s own interpretation of the City’s Code.

According to East Point’s Code, a person who may by impacted by “official action” of the City within the preceding year cannot serve on the Ethics Board; Taylor filed his complaints in October of 2025–four months before he would be appointed by Hemming to the Ethics Board.

Sec. 2-4018. – Board of ethics.

(a) There is created a board of ethics consisting of nine (9) members who are residents of the city and who shall serve without compensation unless the mayor and council provides otherwise. Members of the board of ethics shall not be elected officials, persons appointed to elective office, full-time appointed officials whether exempt or nonexempt, or city employees, nor shall they be currently serving on any other city board, authority, or commission.

(b) Members of the board shall be residents of the city and shall hold no elected public office nor any other city office or employment. No former mayor nor former council member may be eligible for appointment as a member of the board of ethics until one (1) year after the expiration of the term for which such official was elected.

(c) No person shall serve as a member of the board of ethics if the person has, or has had within the preceding one (1) year period, any interest in any contract, transaction, or other official action of the city.

Wiggins relayed to Hemming via a 9:40 P.M. email on February 4th that she believed Taylor’s complaints would fall within the 1 year time frame, thus making him ineligible to serve on the Board.

“Giving the timing of his complaints and potential timing of the ethics board and/or council’s decision on his complaints, he would have had interest within a year of his appointment”, Wiggins wrote in part to Hemming.

The very next day, though having been advised by the City Attorney that Taylor’s ethics timeline in the opinion of Wiggins would prevent him from lawfully serving on the board, Hemming reached out to City Clerk Keshia McCullough, prodding McCullough to rush the timeline for Taylor’s ethics hearings.

It should be noted that the City Clerk does not have direct control over the timing of ethics hearings, however Hemming suggested the City Clerk was not fulfilling her duties, then made a reference to a section of the City’s Code, advising McCullough that the longtime Clerk needed to get in “compliance” over the hearings.

The City Clerk works for the full Council, not individual Councilmembers, which is why to some residents, Hemming’s email reads like a directive–and a vague threat.

In fact, a former elected official we shared Hemming’s email with said the communication even sounded like harassment.

“It’s harassment. There’s also a judgment concern”, said one of our experts. “She was advised by the one person in the city whose legal opinion carries the most weight to not make this appointment–but she moved forward anyway. She could have found another appointee but for some reason, she did not. Residents now are left to ask, Why?”

In a Wednesday, February 18th email, two days after Taylor had been appointed to the Ethics Board at the Monday Council meeting, Hemming pressed Deputy City Clerk Monique Melett on the status of ethics hearings pertaining to Taylor’s pending complaints.

Of particular interest to Hemming was whether or not “proper notice” had been given to the public regarding the pending complaints.

However, our ethics experts advised us that Hemming’s continued involvement with the ethics process–such as inquiring about times, dates, and the speed with which the process was moving–gives the appearance of an effort by Hemming to exert a meddling and potentially unethical influence on Staff. It should be noted that East Point’s City Council has no direct influence over Ethics Board operations, decisions, or activities.

Melett responded with the best timeline she could project for the hearings of both former Councilmembers, and also indicated she was working to get Judge Oliver’s availability in order to get Mr. Taylor sworn in, which seemed to be Hemming’s priority.

In light of these revelations, a number of residents have vowed to file ethics complaints against Hemming, and have also demanded Taylor resign from the Ethics Board.

“She’s corrupt, and he needs to resign”, said Willie, an East Point resident who has lived in the city for 45 years.

“It seems to me she wants to have power and call the shots but she clearly is willing to bend the rules to do that”, said Mary, another longtime resident. “She has shown her willingness to do sketchy things to put friends in power. Disgrace!”, she added.

Hemming has promoted herself as a champion of ethics and fiscal responsibility. But she came under criticism in June when several elderly East Point residents, all of whom are formerly elected officials, discovered she was seeking a “realignment” of taxpayer dollars from senior programs and other community initiatives in order to reroute those funds toward a “Cultural Affairs” fund totaling $1.3 million.

As the budget controversy grew, Hemming dug in, insisting the city pass a budget that itself was incomplete even as residents were still demanding clarity over what was in the budget.

Councilmembers from Ward C, Tremayne Mitchell and T. Starr Cummings, and Ward D, Andrea Caldwell and Latonya Martin-Rogers, held multiple budget town halls in order to inform citizens about the budget and what was in it even as Hemming and her allies on Council, Carrie Ziegler, Shean Atkins, and Eric Friedly, worked to speed the budget along, regardless of the broader community concerns.

At one Council meeting, Ward B’s Ziegler stated that the “boat has sailed” on community input regarding the budget, which elicited widespread criticism across metro Atlanta.

Last week, Hemming, Ziegler, Atkins and Friedly failed to show for a pre-scheduled budget meeting, which resulted in the Council failing to reach quorom.

It’s unclear why the four did not show.

The East Point News reached out to Mr. Taylor and Councilmember Hemming for comments. Hemming offered this response:

“Mr. Herring, Thank you for reaching out. I take questions regarding ethics and public trust seriously. The issue you describe involves the interpretation of the City’s Charter and Ethics Code. I believe those questions should be resolved through the City’s established legal process”.

An email sent to the email address the City listed for Taylor was returned with this message: “Not the right person”.

The City Council will address the issue of Ethics Board appointments at its next meeting, Monday August 3rd, according to the City’s Agenda.