Here's what's on Franklin County's primary ballot: Columbus City Council, school board
There are contested races for three seats on the Columbus City Schools Board of Education, and council seats in the Columbus, Hilliard and Whitehall in the May 6 primary election in Franklin County.
In addition, the county Board of Elections reports three school districts have bond issues on the ballot and there are levies sought several townships, most for police or fire services.
The deadline to file for the May 6 ballot was Wednesday afternoon, and candidates' petition signatures still need to be verified. Here's what could be contested on the primary ballot.
Five people are running in a nonpartisan primary to replace Franklin County Prosecutor Shayla Favor on the council and represent District 7, which includes much of Columbus' urban core neighborhoods like Downtown, Franklinton, Olde Towne East, Italian Village and German Village.
The District 7 candidates are:
Kathryn Curry-Da-Souza, network director of the Success by Third Grade program at the United Way of Central Ohio
Aurora Dasan, a former political science student who would be the council's first transgender member
Densil R. Porteous, executive director of Stonewall Columbus
Tiara Ross, an attorney in the Columbus City Attorney's Office
Jesse Vogel, an attorney at Community Refugee & Immigration Services (CRIS) Ohio who's raised over $70,000 in grassroots donations
As for the three other council seats on the ballot this fall, Council members Chris Wyche (District 1) and Emmanuel Remy (District 4) and Council President Pro Tempore Rob Dorans (District 3) are facing no challengers.
Columbus only holds primaries for city council if more than two people file for a race. Thus, there will only be a primary for District 7.
Related news: Columbus City Council appoints Otto Beatty III to District 7 seat vacancy
After a series of crises rocked the Columbus City Schools Board of Education, 13 people have filed to run for the three seats on the ballot this year, necessitating a primary.
The current holders of the seats, Board President Michael Cole and Board members Christina Vera and Ramona Reyes have decided not to run for reelection.
The candidates in the nonpartisan race are:
Liz Caslin-Turner
Yasmine Farah
Teresa Hannah
Patrick Katzenmeyer
Ivory L. Kennedy, Jr.
Jermaine Kennedy
Janeece Keyes‐Shanklin
Karrie Lumpkin
Mounir F. Lynch
Kimberley Mason
Antoinette Miranda
Tracey L. Sigers
Julie Trabold
Hilliard is one of the few cities in the area that has partisan local elections. Seven Democrats filed to run for the four city council seats on the ballot this year. Four Democrats will advance from the primary.
The Democratic candidates are:
Samer Bazerbashi
Tina Cottone (incumbent)
Dorothy Hassan
Tony Moog
Kathy Parker-Jones
Nadia A. Rasul
Andy Teater
As only three Republicans filed to run for Hilliard City Council, they will not hold a primary. Those candidates are Les Carrier, Jim Martin and Bevan Schneck. They will compete in November against the four winning Democrats for the four council seats.
All four members of Whitehall City Council who represent wards are up for election this year. For Wards 1, 3, and 4, two candidates filed for each race.
But three candidates filed to run for Ward 2, necessitating a primary from which two will advance. Those candidates are:
David F. Coleman Jr.
Brian McCann
Micole Spicer
Three suburban school districts that are partially in Franklin County and partially in neighboring counties are asking for bond issues for facilities construction:
Groveport Madison Local School District is asking for 2.33 mills ($82 for each $100,000 of appraised value for 37 years).
Jonathan Alder Local School District is asking for 5.12 mills ($179 for each $100,000 of appraised value for 37 years).
Teays Valley Local School District is asking for 3.26 mills ($114 for each $100,000 of appraised value for 37 years).
There are also multiple townships with levies on the ballot, most of them for police or fire levies. Mifflin Township, however, is asking residents to approve both a police and a fire levy. Here are the issues on the primary ballot:
2025 Primary Questions and Issues Filed by Jordan on Scribd
jlaird@dispatch.com
@LairdWrites
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Columbus, candidates across Franklin County file for May primary
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
22 minutes ago
- Politico
‘It's made up': Democrats say Rubio isn't playing it straight about foreign aid cuts
Democrats are accusing the Trump administration of lying about the state of America's top global health program following massive cuts to foreign aid led by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency. The administration has cut more than a hundred contracts and grants from the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the HIV and AIDS program credited with saving millions of lives in poor countries. President Donald Trump has shut down the agency that signed off on most PEPFAR spending and fired other staffers who supported it. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested Democrats' concerns are overblown, considering that PEPFAR remains '85 percent operative.' Rubio has made the claim repeatedly in budget testimony before Congress, but neither he nor the State Department will provide a detailed accounting to back up the figure. For flummoxed Democrats, it indicates a broader problem: How to respond to Trump's budget requests when his administration refuses to spend the money Congress has provided. Trump last month asked Congress to cut PEPFAR's budget for next year by 40 percent. 'It's made up,' Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz said when asked by POLITICO about the 85 percent figure. 'It's the most successful, bipartisan, highly efficient life-saving thing that the United States has ever done and Elon Musk went in and trashed it.' Schatz confronted Rubio about the cuts at a Foreign Relations Committee hearing in May, telling him: 'You are required to spend 100 percent of the money.' Rubio said the 15 percent cut targeted programs that weren't delivering the services the government was paying for. He pointed to fraud in Namibia and armed conflict in Sudan as reasons for slashed funding, although it isn't clear those instances were related to PEPFAR. Asked repeatedly by POLITICO for more clarity on what the 85 percent figure represents, a State Department spokesperson said that 'PEPFAR-funded programs that deliver HIV care and treatment or prevention of mother to child transmission services are operational for a majority of beneficiaries.' Data collection is ongoing to capture recent updates to programming, the spokesperson also said, adding: 'We expect to have updated figures later this year.' The day after his exchange with Schatz, Rubio told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that he meant 85 percent of PEPFAR's beneficiaries were still getting U.S. assistance. But the goal, he said, was to pass off all of the work to the countries where the beneficiaries live. 'We're by far the most generous nation on Earth on foreign aid, and will continue to be by far with no other equal, including China, despite all this alarmist stuff,' he said. People who worked on implementing PEPFAR, both inside and outside the government, as well as advocates for HIV prevention and care, are alarmed nonetheless. A State Department report from the month before Trump took office underscores the breadth of its services. In fiscal 2024, the report says, PEPFAR provided medication to 20.6 million people, including 566,000 children, HIV prevention services to 2.3 million girls and women, and testing for 83.8 million. After DOGE dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development in February, several recipients of PEPFAR grants and contracts said they'd had to lay off staff even as Rubio insisted that life-saving aid was continuing. Rubio's skeptics point to the Trump administration's cancellation of more than 100 HIV grants and contracts, representing about 20 percent of PEPFAR's total budget, according to an analysis by the Center for Global Development, an anti-poverty group. In addition to shutting down USAID, the agency that dispensed and monitored much of that funding, the administration fired experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's global health division who worked on the program, including those specializing in maternal and child HIV. 'I'm not sure where he got these numbers,' Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, a senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said of Rubio's 85 percent claim. The lack of clarity has angered HIV activists, who protested against the PEPFAR cuts during the budget hearings where Rubio testified. 'It's unconscionable and alarming to know that 130 days into this administration, Rubio has overseen the completely unnecessary decimation of life-saving services to millions of people, then lying about that fact over and over again,' said Asia Russell, executive director of Health GAP, a nonprofit working on access to HIV treatment in developing countries. Russell was among those arrested for disrupting Rubio's House Foreign Affairs hearing. The confusion around how much of America's celebrated global health program is still operational adds to the uncertainty about the Trump administration's spending plans for the funds Congress appropriated for 2025. And it comes as Congress gears up to consider the president's 2026 budget request. Last month, Trump asked Congress to reduce the PEPFAR budget from $4.8 billion this year to $2.9 billion next. And on Tuesday, the White House asked Congress to claw back $900 million Congress had provided for HIV/AIDS services and other global health initiatives this year, but insisted that it was keeping programs that provide treatment intact. Even if the Trump administration isn't cutting treatment funding, it has cut other awards that ensure drugs reach people, Russell said. She pointed to a terminated USAID award that was delivering drugs to faith-based nonprofit clinics in Uganda. 'The medicine is literally languishing on shelves in a massive warehouse behind the U.S. embassy,' Russell said. Coons said prevention, if that's what's on the chopping block, is as important as treatment: 'For us to step back from supporting not just treatment but prevention puts us at risk of a reemergence of a more lethal, drug resistant form of HIV/AIDS.' Leading Republicans aren't objecting, even though PEPFAR was created by then-President George W. Bush and long enjoyed bipartisan support. Senate Foreign Relations Chair Jim Risch of Idaho declined to comment when POLITICO asked him about the program. Earlier this year, Risch said PEPFAR was 'in jeopardy' after the Biden administration acknowledged that Mozambique, a country in east Africa, had misused program funds to provide at least 21 abortions. Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), who leads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he agrees with the cuts Trump has made and suggested he would want more in the future. 'We also need to be asking the question: How long should American taxpayers borrow money to fund HIV medication for 20 million Africans?' Mast said. The top Democratic appropriators in the House and Senate accused the White House in late May of failing to provide detailed and legally required information about what the administration is doing with billions of dollars Congress directed it to spend. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington and Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut wrote to the White House Office of Management and Budget that the administration's decision to not abide by a funding law Trump signed in March has 'degraded Congress' capacity to carry out its legislative responsibilities' and move forward with fiscal 2026 spending bills. It has also clouded plans for reupping the law that directs the PEPFAR program. It expired in March. Mast has said that Congress would consider PEPFAR's future by September, as part of a larger debate about State Department priorities. But Democrats wonder how they could move forward with reauthorizing the program given the uncertainty surrounding it, said a Senate Democratic aide speaking anonymously to share internal debates.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate passes stripped-back version of ‘no-cause' eviction bill, but House likely to oppose it
Senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. (Getty Images) The New Hampshire Senate passed a bill Thursday intended to make it easier for landlords to terminate tenancies. But before passing it, senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. In current law, New Hampshire landlords must cite a specific reason to initiate evictions, including nonpayment of rent, failure to follow the lease, behavior affecting the health or safety of others, or a business reason by the landlord, such as a renovation. As originally passed by the House, House Bill 60 would have allowed for 'no-fault' or 'no-cause' termination of tenancies for leases six months or longer. In those cases, landlords could ask a tenant to leave at the end of the lease period with no reason given. Republicans argue allowing no-cause evictions would let landlords treat leases as fixed-length contracts with tenants, and relieve them of the burden of finding a reason if they no longer wished to rent to someone. But Democrats and legal aid organizations argue it would increase the pace of evictions and could make it easier for landlords to discriminate. On Thursday, the Senate dramatically altered the bill, keeping the 'no-fault' evictions but adding a trigger provision that prevents application of the law unless the state has had a 4% or higher rental vacancy rate for four quarters in one calendar year, as determined by the Federal Reserve. Currently, the Federal Reserve estimates New Hampshire has exactly a 4% vacancy rate, citing U.S. Census data. The Senate's version would also allow landlords to use no-cause evictions only with leases of 12 months or more. And it would exempt tenants who are subject to no-cause evictions from having those evictions added to their record for the purpose of rental applications and tenant screening reports, easing concerns from housing advocates about the effects of the original bill. Those changes earned the support of Senate Democrats; the amended bill was voted through unanimously Thursday. But before the bill can go to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk, it must receive final sign-off from the House, and some House Republicans have made it clear they are not happy with the Senate's changes. Rep. Joe Alexander, a Goffstown Republican and the chairman of the Housing Committee, said he will be requesting a Committee of Conference with the Senate to attempt to find a compromise when the House meets on Thursday. The Senate's version of the bill does not fit with the House's position, Alexander said in an interview. And he noted that the full House already voted down two attempted Democratic amendments to add trigger provisions. 'The House position is the lease is a contract,' Alexander said. 'And (in) every other place in contract law, when a contract ends, both parties go their separate ways unless there's conversation about renewing it. So we're just trying to bring it in line with all other contract law in the state.' Elliott Berry, a former attorney for New Hampshire Legal Assistance who has been following the bill, said even with the Senate changes, he and other housing advocates believe HB 60 could harm tenants. 'It's going to make a lot of landlords take the easy way out,' he said. 'And so tenants who for whatever reason feel any kind of antagonism towards them in general, well-based or not, they're going to be in jeopardy.'
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
California to Sue Trump for ‘Illegal' National Guard Mobilization
California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard in Ceres on April 16, 2025. Credit - Justin Sullivan—Getty Images Governor Gavin Newsom of California announced that his state plans to file a lawsuit early Monday against Donald Trump for mobilizing the National Guard over the weekend to quell immigration-related protests in Los Angeles. As news broadcasts and social media have proliferated with scenes of violence and mayhem on the streets of southern California, Newsom alleged in an interview with MSNBC on Sunday evening that it is the U.S. President who 'created the conditions you see on your TV tonight.' Newsom condemned the violence, calling it 'unacceptable' and 'wrong.' He added that there were 'a lot of great people out there, doing the right thing,' but that 'insurgent groups' and 'anarchists' were infiltrating the demonstrations 'to create real problems.' 'They're just playing right into Donald Trump's hand. And they need to be called out and they need to be arrested,' Newsom said of the bad actors. 'They're doing more than damage to buildings and to property. They're potentially damaging the very foundation of our republic. Democracy is in the balance.' When asked if he supports the peaceful protesters, Newsom responded emphatically: 'Of course I support them. Protest is the foundation of this democracy. It's what makes this country great. And that needs to persist. And right now people need to come out. But we need to be mindful of the toxicity of this moment, and then we have to deal with these elements that are coming in that are intentionally trying to take advantage of this in a way that only aids and abets Donald Trump.' Newsom added that his priority is to keep peaceful protesters as well as 'those that are enforcing the laws in a respectful and responsible way' safe. Newsom, whose second and final term as Governor ends in 2027 and who is speculated to be a 2028 Democratic presidential contender, repeatedly focused his blame for the escalation of the situation in California on Trump: 'He's exacerbated the conditions. He's lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire,' Newsom said, calling the mobilization of the National Guard 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' 'Donald Trump needs to pull back. He needs to stand down. Donald Trump is inflaming these conditions. This is Donald Trump's problem right now, and if he can't solve it, we will.' Here's what to know. Mass protests and demonstrations have taken place across Los Angeles county since Friday in response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented residents and laborers. While local officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and the city council, sided with peaceful protesters in opposition to the immigration enforcement actions, demonstrations grew increasingly violent, as clashes intensified between some demonstrators and law enforcement officials. Rocks and molotov cocktails have been thrown; police vehicles and self-driving Waymo cars have been vandalized; and authorities have used tear gas, 'flash bang' grenades, and rubber bullets to attempt crowd control, according to reports. 'Everyone has the right to peacefully protest, but let me be clear: violence and destruction are unacceptable, and those responsible will be held accountable,' Bass said in a post on X on Saturday. In a White House memorandum on Saturday, Trump said the anti-ICE protests 'constitute a form of rebellion' against the U.S. and ordered Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deploy 2,000 National Guard personnel in response. In a post on X, Hegseth said the National Guard would be mobilized 'IMMEDIATELY.' Hegseth added that 'if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized—they are on high alert.' To mobilize the National Guard, Trump invoked Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, which allows for the federalization of the National Guard in cases of an invasion or a rebellion, or if the President is unable to execute the country's laws with 'regular forces.' Section 12406, however, also states that 'Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' Newsom confirmed that he did not request the deployment of the National Guard, making it the first time since 1965 that the National Guard has been activated to a state without a governor's request. In an open letter to Hegseth, Newsom's office called the mobilization 'a serious breach of state sovereignty' and requested that the Pentagon chief 'immediately rescind' the order and 'return the National Guard to its rightful control by the State of California, to be deployed as appropriate when necessary.' The Democratic Governors Association backed Newsom in a statement, saying: 'It's important we respect the executive authority of our country's governors to manage their National Guards.' Moreover, an 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, limits federal military personnel from being used for civilian law enforcement within the U.S., which means in Los Angeles the National Guard forces mobilized by Trump can protect federal agents, such as ICE officials, and federal properties, such as detention centers, but they cannot arrest protesters. The Posse Comitatus Act 'prohibits troops from being used domestically unless the Insurrection Act is invoked,' constitutional scholar and dean of UC Berkeley Law School Erwin Chemerinsky tells TIME, 'and the President has not done that.' According to Reuters, Trump still could invoke the Insurrection Act, but doing so would enter 'riskier legal territory.' The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was when President George H.W. Bush mobilized the National Guard to quell riots in Los Angeles following the acquittal of the police officers involved in the beating of Rodney King. But a key difference between 1992 and now is that then-Governor of California Pete Wilson had requested federal assistance. Calling in troops to suppress protests has also raised First Amendment concerns. The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement on Saturday that it also plans to file a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, calling the mobilization of the National Guard an 'abuse of power.' Earlier on Sunday, Trump's 'border czar' Tom Homan, who has previously threatened arrest for anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement, told MSNBC that he would not rule that out even for officials like Newsom and Bass. 'I'll say it about anybody,' Homan said. 'It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' 'Governor Newsom is an embarrassment to the state,' Homan added. 'Criminal aliens are walking the streets of this state every day because of him and his policies.' In his interview hours later with MSNBC, Newsom responded, saying: 'That kind of bloviating is exhausting.' Newsom challenged Homan to arrest him but to 'lay your hands off' law-abiding, tax-paying undocumented residents. 'He's a tough guy. Why doesn't he do that? He knows where to find me,' he said. 'Come after me. Arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy. I don't give a damn. But I care about my community. I care about this community.' Newsom criticized the Trump Administration for targeting non-criminal undocumented residents for immigration enforcement and pushed back on the accusation that California does not cooperate with the federal government. 'I have no problem with going after criminals. We coordinate and collaborate with ICE,' Newsom said, pointing to the state handing over more than 10,000 inmates to ICE since he took office in 2019. 'When these guys say we don't go after criminals, again, they're lying, and they're knowingly lying.' When asked if Trump could be putting the spotlight on Los Angeles to take attention away from his recent fallout with Elon Musk, Newsom said 'of course,' also citing Trump's struggles to pass the massive tax and spending package known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in Congress as well as ongoing challenges related to Trump's global trade war. 'He's the master of distraction. He's the commander of chaos. That's what Donald Trump does,' said Newsom. Newsom claimed that Trump used 'the guise of immigration' to create a 'manufactured crisis' in order to challenge the Posse Comitatus Act. 'This is about authoritarian tendencies. This is about command and control. This is about power. This is about ego,' said Newsom. 'This is a consistent pattern of practice of recklessness. This guy has abandoned the great principles of this great democracy. He's threatening to go after judges he disagrees with, cut off funding to institutions of higher learning, he's on a cultural binge, he's rewriting history, censoring historical facts. This is something completely different, and this is part of that ongoing play that is unfolding in front of our eyes.' Contact us at letters@
