The Gordon Gazette has learned that Calhoun Fire Department's Fire Chief Lenny Nesbitt and Deputy Fire Chief Terry Mills were placed on administrative leave as of last week.

 

The Gazette has reached out to a city official, who responded that there is no comment at this time.

 

The Gazette can confirm that City of Calhoun, along with Nesbitt, Mills and City Administrator Paul Worley, were all named in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in late November 2023 by a former firefighter who alleges he was retaliated against for reporting a complaint of “serious sexual misconduct occurring at the Fire Department and other City property toward a 17-year-old female high school student by a senior Fire Department leader.” The suit also claims the City of Calhoun Fire Department submitted falsified training hours to an ISO auditor so the City of Calhoun would receive a positive ISO score.

 

ORIGINAL STORY: The City of Calhoun is being sued in U.S. District Court by a former firefighter who alleges he was retaliated against for reporting a complaint of “serious sexual misconduct occurring at the Fire Department and other City property toward a 17-year-old female high school student by a senior Fire Department leader.” The suit also claims the City of Calhoun Fire Department submitted falsified training hours to an ISO auditor so the City of Calhoun would receive a positive ISO score.

 

According to the suit, Plaintiff Christopher Cox, the former Division Chief of Training for the Calhoun Fire Department, is asking the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Rome Division for a jury trial against defendants the City of Calhoun, Fire Chief Lenny Nesbitt, Deputy Fire Chief Terry Mills and City Administrator Paul Worley in their official and individual capacities.

 

According to the document, filed in US District Court on November 30, 2023, Cox raised concerns about alleged abuse of authority, alleged misuse of city property and resources, and alleged criminal requests for child pornography by a City leader, and claimed he was a whistleblower pursuant to the Georgia Whistleblower Act O.C.G.A. 45-1-4.

 

The filing alleges there have been several situations involving sexual misconduct by other Fire Department leaders that occurred during the time Cox was employed at the Fire Department.

 

The most recent incident, according to the filing, was a complaint concerning former Calhoun firefighter Roger Smith and allegations of sexual misconduct towards a 17-year-old female student. In August 2022, “a female citizen of Calhoun (the “Complainant”) contacted Plaintiff [Cox] to share information about sexual misconduct by Roger Smith toward a 17-year-old female high school student,” the filing states. “The Complainant informed Plaintiff [Cox] that Roger Smith’s misconduct occurred at the Fire Station while other firefighters were present. The Complainant informed Plaintiff [Cox] that Roger Smith was pursuing the 17-year-old high school student and that he was encouraging her to have sex with him at the Fire Station and stay overnight with him while other firefighters were present in the workplace. The Complainant also alleged Roger Smith was making lewd, graphic, and vulgar comments to the 17-year-old victim and touching her in a sexual manner while on Fire Department property, which could expose other employees to the sexual acts.”

 

The suit alleges that “the Complainant further stated to Plaintiff [Cox] that she had already shared these concerns with Defendant Deputy Chief Mills, who reported it to Defendant Chief Nesbitt and gave him text and audio recordings provided by the 17-year-old victim to corroborate these claims; however, nothing was done.”

 

According to the minutes from the Oct. 10, 2022 City Council meeting, in mid-September 2022, Roger Smith was promoted to A Shift Battalion Chief.

 

The lawsuit alleges that in early December 2022, the Complainant provided text messages and audio recordings from the 17-year-old to Cox.

 

“These text messages were crude and damaging to the reputation of the Fire Department and City of Calhoun. These text messages and audio recordings confirmed Roger Smith met with the 17-year old female on Fire Department property, made comments to her of a sexual nature, and otherwise acted toward her in a sexually inappropriate manner. The text messages from Roger Smith to the 17-year old female also confirmed that Roger Smith asked her to spend the night in the fire station with him to have sex,” the filing reads and then asserted that “Roger Smith requested that the 17-year-old female send him ‘naughty’ pictures,” and the filing notes that “requesting nude pictures of the genitals of a person under 18-years-old” is “a felony in Georgia and under federal law,” and the request to receive the photos “would have exposed Fire Department employees to illegal child pornography.”

 

According to the filing, Cox then went to City Administrator Paul Worley and reported the specific allegations  made by the Complainant concerning the alleged sexual harassment and alleged sexual misconduct by Roger Smith. The filing states that “upon information and belief, Defendant Chief Nesbitt and Defendant City Administrator Worley became worried that the complaint by Plaintiff [Cox] would become public knowledge and cause a scandal for the City of Calhoun and Fire Department. Therefore, they conspired to cover it up.”

 

According to the filing, in “an effort to prevent the matter from becoming public, on December 12, 2022, Plaintiff [Cox] was fired by Defendants City Administrator Worley and Chief Nesbitt for reporting the sexual harassment and misconduct of Roger Smith. During Plaintiff’s [Cox] termination meeting, Plaintiff attempted to provide to Defendants City Administrator Worley and Chief Nesbitt with all the text message evidence of the hostile work environment and sexual misconduct of Roger Smith; however, they refused to accept or even look at it…Plaintiff was forced to leave the building that day immediately following the meeting, and he left the printed copies of the text messages on his desk following his termination.”

 

The filing states that the termination “was in retaliation for reporting a hostile work environment and sexual misconduct, even though Plaintiff [Cox] reported in the manner exactly prescribed by the City’s Non-Harassment Policy.”

 

The filing goes on to say that after Cox’s termination, “City of Calhoun officials were forced to address Roger Smith’s conduct. The father of the 17-year old female called Defendant Chief Nesbitt and demanded that he address the misconduct toward and victimization of his daughter by Roger Smith.

 

“The City of Calhoun determined that Roger Smith had, in fact, engaged in severe sexual misconduct, which establishes that the City of Calhoun was aware that the complaint made by Plaintiff [Cox] of sexual misconduct by Roger Smith was true,” continued the filing. “Roger Smith was given the option to resign or be terminated due to his misconduct. On December 20, 2022, Roger Smith elected to resign effective immediately.”

 

The filing then alleges that in late 2022, Chief Nesbitt allegedly became worried that the Fire Department’s Shift A, which Roger Smith was over, did not have enough training hours for 2022.

 

“This deficiency would negatively impact the Fire Department’s score in the ISO audit, which is closely monitored by the City of Calhoun and insurance carriers and reported to the general public,” the filing reads. “Plaintiff [Cox] had raised this issue with the Defendant Chief Nesbitt on at least seven occasions since the summer of 2022, because Shift A, which was managed by Roger Smith, refused to train in the summer heat. Plaintiff [Cox] believed it important to hold the training during the summer for numerous reasons, including because firefighters should be prepared to combat fires in all conditions and weather. Just as Defendant Chief Nesbitt refused to address the severe sexual misconduct in the workplace by Roger Smith and Defendant Deputy Chief Mills, he refused to address the failure of Roger Smith to require his firefighters to attend training.”

 

The filing then alleges “With the ISO audit about to take place in early January 2023, the Fire Department’s Shift A did not have enough time to make up the training hours they had previously refused. Therefore, Defendant Chief Nesbitt conspired with Defendant Deputy Chief Mills and Defendant City Administrator Worley and others to falsify the record of training hours so they could pass the ISO audit in January 2023. These actions defrauded the city and insurance carriers who rely upon their ISO audit scores.”

 

An ISO (Insurance Services Office) Rating determines how well a fire department can protect your community and home. Insurance companies use the score to help set home insurance rates, as a home that is less likely to be severely damaged or destroyed by fire is cheaper to insure. An ISO score can even cause an insurer to deny coverage in some circumstances. On the ISO rating scale, a lower number is better: one is the best possible rating, while a 10 means the fire department did not meet ISO's minimum requirements.

 

According to the City’s 2023 Budget book, “The Fire Department obtained an ISO Class 3 rating in 2013 and has retained the rating due to many hours of hard work, aggressive training, and forward thinking along with support and cooperation by Calhoun Utilities and the Mayor and Council. The Fire Chief and staff will continue to address issues and recommendations from the ISO to improve the effectiveness of the department through training, planning, and staff coordination.”

 

“Defendants knew that Plaintiff [Cox] would not allow the training records to be falsified and submitted to ISO auditors. In fact, Defendant Chief Nesbitt had requested Plaintiff [Cox] falsify training records on a past occasion but Plaintiff had refused,” the court filing alleges. “Defendant Chief Nesbitt and Defendant City Administrator Worley ensured that Plaintiff [Cox] was terminated and not reinstated even though they knew the complaint of sexual harassment and misconduct raised by Plaintiff was true and despite knowing that Roger Smith had victimized a young girl.”

 

The filing claims that Plaintiff [Cox] appealed his termination (in writing) on December 16, 2022 and that a hearing was held concerning his appeal on January 18, 2023. The filing states that text message evidence provided by Plaintiff [Cox] was part of the evidence in record and reviewable by the hearing examiner, but the examiner denied the Plaintiff’s appeal and “reaffirmed his retaliatory termination on March 2, 2023.”

 

Cox is seeking a jury trial on all issues and asks that the Court award him general damages, including but not limited to those for emotional distress, inconvenience and mental anguish, along with back pay and benefits and front pay and benefits, punitive/exemplary damages, attorney’s fees and costs and post-judgment interest at the highest rate authorized by law.

 

The City of Calhoun, Nesbitt, Mills and Worley filed their answer to the complaint on February 5, 2024 and in the filing, deny most of the allegations against them. The Defendants also deny Plaintiff [Cox] is entitled to any of the relief from his requests, asking the Court to dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff’s Complaint, enter judgment in favor of Defendants against Plaintiff and award Defendants reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses pursuant to applicable law.

 

Later on February 26, 2024, the City of Calhoun filed an exhibit for their response. That exhibit includes the full Facts and Law findings and the decision related to the hearing for Christopher Cox where he had appealed his termination. According to the document, the examiner used for the appeal meeting was local attorney William (Bill) Thompson, Jr.

 

The appeal hearing took place on January 18, 2023 at the Depot Community Room in downtown Calhoun. According to the document, witnesses present for the appeal were Worley, Nesbitt, Mills and Calhoun Chief of Police Tony Pyle. Documents were admitted for consideration by the City and the defense was allowed to submit documents to be considered by Thompson. The Exhibit says that Cox did not testify at that January 18, 2023 Appeal Hearing and presented no witnesses to testify on his behalf with the only evidence directly presented on Cox’s behalf were the documents admitted into evidence which included an Appeal (written) statement by Cox.

 

Thompson said that according to Cox’s written statement, he was contacted by a “woman” (complainant), which Cox reported he was familiar with and that he knew the complainant was related to the ex-wife of Smith, so he assumed it was a domestic dispute. The Exhibit also states that Cox disclosed in his written Appeal that he made no attempt to determine whether any of the information he was provided was accurate, and that Cox was told by the complainant that an allegation had been previously made but that the officials at the fire department had taken no action.

 

Thompson’s Finding of Facts states that “the evidence clearly establishes that Smith’s conduct was inappropriate, although not charged as illegal by the Calhoun Police Department upon investigation.” The document also says that “The City does not dispute the basic allegations as they relate to Smith; however, it maintains that the employment action taken against Cox was still appropriate” and detailed three basic allegations in support of the action to terminate Cox’s employment that included: the first relates to violating the proper chain of command; second, that in addition to allegations made relating to Smith Cox made allegations of a cover-up against Nesbitt and Mills; and third, Cox failed to appropriately fulfill his duties by deliberately or negligently disregarding requests concerning training shortcomings at the City of Calhoun Fire Department.

 

Thompson states in the Exhibit that despite violating the chain of command, “for purposes of operating a fire department, this Examiner finds that failing to follow that chain of command with regard to this allegation would not, in and of itself, be sufficient grounds for termination.

 

“There was evidence presented that Cox had violated the chain of command before and had been warned not to continue the practice,” the document continues. “However, allegations of sexual improprieties between fire department personnel and minors in the community are serious and should be disclosed, investigated and, if necessary, punitive action including appropriate criminal action, instituted. If all that had taken place was the out-of-chain command disclosure, this Examiner doubts this matter would have ever reached the level of termination. Even though there does not appear to be any specific law in Georgia relating to the application of standard operating procedures commonly used by fire departments and law enforcement agencies as regarding to Whistleblower complaints, O.C.G.A. 45-1-4(d)(1) provides that: ‘No public employer shall make, adopt, or enforce any policy or practice preventing a public employee from disclosing a violation of or noncompliance with a law, rule, or regulation to either a supervisor or a government agency.’ This Examiner finds that Cox’s disclosure protected him from the manner in which he made the disclosure, i.e., to the City Administrator, and that the Whistleblower Statue protects him from retaliation on that ground.”

 

The Exhibit document then lays out the findings dealing with whether or not Nesbitt and Mills were engaged in a cover-up of illegal, or highly inappropriate, activity between Smith and a 17-year-old girl.

 

“While the allegations are basically the same, the allegations of a cover up by the highest officials in the Department bring the matter to a whole new level,” said Thompson in the Exhibit. He went on to say, “In its simplest form, the City takes the position that Cox either lied in making the allegation against his superiors or acted with reckless disregard concerning those allegations. Cox’s written Appeal, which is the only real evidence of Cox’s rebuttal that is available, does not really address the specific allegations he made against Nesbitt and Mills at his meeting with Worley on December 2, 2022. It appears that Cox’s basic position is that it does not matter whether the disclosure was 100% accurate in order to maintain Whistleblower protection. In other words, Cox is basically admitting that his allegations of coverup are simply not true.

If Cox had made only the limited disclosure that he had been told, along with the other limiting factors in his statement, the situation would have been very different.”

 

Thompson then goes on to say the City states that Cox’s the termination was not based on the complaint against Smith, but “also based upon the false allegations against Nesbitt and Mills. There is no question that the allegations made by Cox to Worley were false and this Examiner is left with no doubt that those allegations were recklessly false.”

 

Thompson said that “In the present case, Cox substantially altered the information he had been given to commit to what amount(s) to a slander per se of Nesbitt and Mills,” referencing O.C.G.A. 51-5-4. “Cox did not have a factual basis for this allegation and his Appeal statement clearly states two things: First, he knew to be wary of the information he was given, and second, he had no other real information other than some form of complaint had been made and no action (had) been taken for six weeks. Cox had two options. The first, if he chose to insert himself into this issue, he needed to make sure inquiry to verify the information he was providing or at least not embellish the story he had been told. Second, he had the simple option of making an inquiry of either Nesbitt or Mills to see if a complaint had been made and receive some information as to the complaint’s status. It appears that Cox intentionally chose to do neither and reasons appear to arise from ill intent on Cox’s part. Therefore, has the City met its burden to provide a non-pretextual reason for Cox’s dismissal, and the answer to that is clearly yes.”

 

Thompson goes on to say “Cox’s actions appear to be driven by several factors and all of those factors show animas by Cox and to Nesbitt and Mills. The first factor was a complaint made concerning Mills back in 2016 for which Mills was reprimanded by the Department. The second factor appears to be Cox’s belief that Nesbitt had a general pattern of ignoring complaints. Third, an ongoing issue of Cox’s desire for a training protocol in the Department, partially at odds with Mills and partially at odds with a number of other firefighters. These issues came to a head at promotion time. Cox wished to be considered for a battalion chief position and was discouraged by his supervisors based largely on his relationship with the individual firefighters on that shift. Cox believed, and in essence, he states in his Appeal that he was being singled out and not treated appropriately. Cox’s reaction was to fail to apply for consideration for advancement as battalion chief. After Smith was elevated, Cox was dissatisfied to the point of filing one of the few Grievances the City of Calhoun Fire Department have ever had to adjudicate.”

 

Thompson indicates the Grievance was dismissed for the reason that “Cox failed to even apply for the position for which he wished to be considered. Cox may very well have believed that Smith did not deserve to be elevated and he may have believed the allegations against Smith fully vindicated him in that belief. However, it does not justify Cox in making slanderous statements about his superiors and then trying to hide behind the Whistleblowers Statute.”

 

In the charges related to Cox failing to fulfill his duties, Thompson states that “Cox was given an email from Mills on December 1, 2022, relating to the Department’s ISO Audit. In that email Cox was asked to provide information so the Department could identify missing items between the date of the email on December 1st and December 16, 2022. According to Mills’ testimony, there was never a response and Cox was terminated on December 12, 2022. Cox’s response in his Appeal is in direct contravention to the email. The email clearly asked for information to be gathered and gives a deadline of December 16. Cox’s position is that he simply had a meeting on December 16, 2022. Regardless, the basic allegation against Cox was accurate and Cox was not responsive to his superiors. Second, because of the importance of an ISO Audit the issue could have been interpreted in many ways but this issue is not a pretext simply to justify employment action taken against Cox.”

 

Thompson went on to say “The City has responded with multiple grounds for termination that are not retaliatory so the burden ultimately lies with Cox to refute the City’s position. Unfortunately, Cox’s written Appeal, which is the only statement of his position available, fails to truly address the City’s positions supporting his termination. In the absence of Cox’s ability to refute the City’s allegations, any claim Cox has under Title VII (retaliation claims) ultimately fails.”

 

Thompson concluded that “based upon the Examiner’s Findings of Fact and Findings of Law, the Examiner determines that the adverse employment action taken against Christopher Cox by the City of Calhoun on December 12, 2022, was justified and that Cox’s termination of employment with the Fire Department of the City of Calhoun, Georgia is allowed to stand.”

 

The case has been referred to U.S. District Magistrate Judge Walter E. Johnson, and was assigned to a four-month discovery track that began on March 6, 2024.

​

As of mid-August 2025, the case is still active in U.S. District Court and has not gone to trial. 

​

View the original complaint HERE

​

View the City of Calhoun's response HERE