Greenville County councilors and residents spar over school funding as chair says next-year budget will not cut schools

Greenville County Council heard sustained public comment and council debate May 20 over whether the county budget should change funding for the Greenville County School District, with County Chairman Benton Blount telling the chamber the county’s budget workshops yielded a plan that will not reduce the school board’s operating budget for the coming fiscal year.

“At our budget workshop … we have it worked out currently where none of the school board budget for this coming fiscal year will be affected whatsoever. $0,” Chairman Benton Blount said at the start of the public-comment period.

Why it matters: Speakers and several council members said the proposed county budget and public messaging have created confusion and alarm among teachers, parents and staff. The debate touched on teacher pay, school reserves and which taxes or county priorities should be funded first.

Councilor Kurt McGaughey pushed back against what he called misinformation from the district and outside groups, attributing numbers to the school district’s own public reporting. “Based on their own fiscal reporting … the school district has sufficient funding to give teachers larger raises than they are giving,” McGaughey said in remarks to the chamber. He also cited figures he said were from the district’s audit — including what he described as a $78 million excess in the prior year and a general fund balance he said exceeded $240 million — and said those figures explained his insistence the county examine district spending before making changes.

Public commenters pressed both sides. Several speakers representing educators, parents and local businesses urged the council not to cut school funding, saying schools are a draw for workers and local employers and warning that cuts would have knock-on effects for housing and workforce stability. Susan Scarborough Smith, a longtime homeowner who said her children and interns have strong ties to the district, told the council she was relieved by the chair’s announcement but remained worried about future changes: “I was thrilled earlier today to hear that you're tabling the funding cuts to the school district as of now, but I felt that I still needed to come and speak because I was given that as of now,” she said.

Council process and next steps: No formal council vote on school funding changes occurred during the meeting. Blount’s statement that the school board budget would be left intact came as the county continued budget review; members said discussions would continue in committee and on the council floor. Councilors suggested the final county budget will be refined through the normal Committee of the Whole and appropriation processes.

What council members said about messaging and process: Multiple councilors said public statements from the school district and from other parties had inflamed public debate. McGaughey told the chamber the district’s communications had been misleading and urged more public scrutiny of all government budgets. Other councilors urged civility and fuller briefing of colleagues before public statements.

Ending: Council members and the public agreed the conversation would continue as the county advances its fiscal year 2026 budget process; no formal changes to the school district’s appropriation were made at the meeting.