Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hiring Eligibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Civil Service Commission denies some deputy applicants, advances others after inquiry reviews
Summary
On May 20, the Berkeley County Deputy Sheriff Civil Service Commission reviewed 48 applications and, after inquiry responses, denied multiple applicants under commission rules and forwarded several files to the sheriff’s department for background checks and testing eligibility ahead of the June 13 deputy exam.
The Berkeley County Deputy Sheriff Civil Service Commission on May 20 reviewed multiple applicant inquiry files and voted to deny some applicants while advancing others to the sheriff’s department for further investigation and eligibility to take the June 13 deputy exam.
The panel denied applicant number 4 after reviewing an expunged criminal charge and a termination from a Virginia law-enforcement agency for conduct described as involving alcohol and a disturbance; commissioners concluded the dismissal met the commission’s disqualifying criteria and voted to deny the application. Applicant number 5 withdrew from consideration and required no vote.
Staff reported that applicant number 8 had claimed veteran preference but submitted a DD-214 showing a ‘‘general’’ separation (separation code JK) for misconduct related to drug abuse rather than an honorable discharge. Staff said that fact and the commission’s Article 2, Section 4 rules led to rejection; staff notified the applicant accordingly.
By contrast, the commission advanced several applicants to the sheriff’s department for the next stage of background investigation rather than outright rejection. Applicant number 9 disclosed past juvenile-era misuse of prescription medication and limited marijuana use; commissioners noted the most recent nonjuvenile use was outside the 12‑month window and voted to forward the file for sheriff review. Applicant number 17 disclosed multiple debts from 2023 and explained steps being taken to repay them; the commission voted to forward that file and allow the applicant to proceed to testing. Applicant number 19 acknowledged brief juvenile‑era involvement buying and selling small amounts of marijuana and said he had not used since 2017; commissioners debated but ultimately voted to advance his application for sheriff review and permit testing.
Applicant number 14 appeared in person and acknowledged past petty-theft and drug-related conduct and told the commission, "I've learned from those mistakes." Commissioners reviewed the conviction and the applicant’s record and found the disqualifying factors in the commission’s rules, moving to reject the application by voice vote.
Staff told the commission that, as of the meeting, 48 applications had been submitted for the open-entry test: 30 were currently considered candidates, five had been rejected, two had withdrawn, and additional files remained pending inquiries. Staff also said the sheriff’s office had six current vacancies; commissioners noted the June 13 test timeline compressed the sequence for special meetings to complete certifications and selections.
The commission indicated it would forward advanced files to the sheriff’s department for their standard background checks and final hiring decisions and will notify applicants of testing and eligibility details by email. The next regular meeting was set for June 17 at 5:00 p.m.
