Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Connections Eligibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin County commissioners table two Community Connections awards after public comment
Summary
After a county resident raised concerns about the criminal history of a named Community Connections award recipient, commissioners removed two consent-agenda items and voted to table them pending investigation.
Franklin County commissioners on an evening meeting removed two Community Connections awards from the consent agenda and unanimously voted to table those items for further investigation after a county resident raised questions about a recipient’s criminal history.
Dave Jones, a command center operator with the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office who said he was speaking as a private citizen, told commissioners he had reviewed public records and a news account about an award recipient identified as Sharina Lewis. Jones said the account included felony and multiple misdemeanor charges, a reported $30,000 bail, a scheduled hearing Oct. 23 before Judge Schenck, and additional dockets dating to 2004. “An individual with a 20 year history of crime, I do not believe that our tax dollars should be subsidizing a person like that,” Jones said.
The public comment prompted a commissioner to ask that agenda items 3.02 and 3.03 be removed from the consent agenda “pending further investigation.” County Solicitor Salket explained the procedure, saying, “Just 1 commissioner saying I would like it removed removes it from the consent agenda.” The commissioner then moved to table the two items; another commissioner seconded the motion and the board voted in favor.
The Community Connections application form discussed during the meeting includes a space for a credit check and a criminal background check, Jones noted, and he asked how an applicant with the records he described could have been approved. Commissioners did not provide further details about the program’s vetting process at the meeting and directed staff to investigate the public comment and the two consent items.
The transcript of public comment and the subsequent actions record the allegations and the board’s immediate procedural response; the county did not provide additional documentation or staff reports on the awards during the meeting. The sheriff’s office employee who spoke said the matters cited — including the pending court dates and the bail amount — are public record. Commissioners said they would look into the items and report back.
