Franklin County authorizes court action to seek sealed poll tapes

Franklin County commissioners voted 5-0 on April 6 to authorize the county attorney to initiate litigation seeking poll tapes that the county resolution identifies as being under seal. The action came during the Board of Commissioners’ regular meeting, with Commissioners Smith and Thompson participating by Zoom and casting verbal votes by phone, according to the minutes.

The unanimous resolution moves the county’s effort beyond a commission decision and toward a possible court proceeding. A board vote alone does not unseal records: the county attorney would have to bring the matter before a court, and any access to the tapes would depend on further legal action.

At the April 6 meeting, commissioners considered a resolution specifically authorizing litigation to secure the sealed poll tapes, then approved it without opposition. That approval created authority for the county attorney to act, but the minutes record the authorization itself rather than subsequent steps in a courthouse.

The commission’s recorded position was unanimous: all five commissioners supported authorizing the county attorney to pursue the tapes through litigation. The resolution places the next potential action with the county attorney, while a court would decide any request affecting records described as sealed; the minutes do not identify arguments from other parties or explain why the tapes are sealed.

The resolution’s passage is complete and documented. What is not established is whether the county attorney filed a complaint, whether a court opened a case or scheduled a hearing, or whether any judge ordered the tapes released. The record also does not state the legal basis the county would use, the reason for the seal, or whether the county ultimately obtained the materials.

The next public indication of progress would be a court filing or docket entry tied to the county attorney’s authorization, followed by any hearing or ruling on access to the tapes. Until such action is documented, the central questions remain whether the county pursued the authorized lawsuit and whether a court will alter the tapes’ sealed status.