The return of former board attorney Randy Sherard to employment by Warren County supervisors is good news. Sherard, experienced through 13 years of previous county employment, has a spotless record of providing legal guidance. Two added benefits are:

* He worked for less compensation than the board attorney who preceded him and less than attorney Paul Winfield, who has served for the past four years.

* Sherard is also a civil engineer. Many county contracts involve construction on a wide variety of projects and, even though the county also retains an engineer and engineering firm, it can’t hurt that the board’s attorney speaks their language.

The down side is the attitude shown in comments by District 3 Supervisor Charles Selmon and District 2 Supervisor William Banks. Both voted against Sherard, with Selmon saying applications should have been taken and Banks implying an earlier breach of legal ethics by Sherard.

Normally we would agree that ideally the best hiring decisions are based on more than one candidate. In this case, it would have been a waste of time. With Sherard available, willing and experienced, no one could match his qualifications. Interviews would have been pointless.

As for Banks, if he, as a public official, believes a violation has occurred, he should report it to the Mississippi Bar Association, which licenses attorneys to practice.

Winfield is a rising star in local and state politics. He’s treasurer of the state Democratic Executive Committee and is actively campaigning to become mayor of Vicksburg. He resigned as attorney for the supervisors, citing his other pursuits.

He was initially the choice for the county job on a 3-2 vote in which Selmon and Banks were joined by former District 4 Supervisor Carl Flanders, and Winfield served his last year on a unanimous vote by the board. By any measure, that speaks well for his service.

Selmon said he thought it would be difficult to have Sherard as attorney because Sherard didn’t have the full board’s confidence. Frankly, that’s pretty juvenile. It’s like Selmon saying he can’t be an effective supervisor because he didn’t poll 100 percent of the District 3 vote or that Winfield didn’t do a good job because, at least initially, he had two board votes against him.

Further, in the specific case of Sherard, his record is one of working for the best interests of the county, period. Fits of pique are understandable, but in this case a board majority chose well.