Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Board Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johnston County board debates partisan-election resolution; board votes against change
Summary
After more than an hour of debate, the Johnston County Board of Education rejected a resolution to convert future school board elections from nonpartisan to partisan ballots. The proposal prompted arguments about voter access, party influence and whether the change should come from a public process rather than the board.
The Johnston County Board of Education on the April meeting considered and rejected a resolution that would switch future school board elections from nonpartisan to partisan contests.
The motion, presented by Board member Robert Tippett and seconded by Michelle Antoine, would have required candidates to declare party affiliation and have ballots printed showing party reference; the draft cited North Carolina General Statute 115C-37.1 as the authority for partisan local school board elections in certain counties.
Supporters argued the change would increase voter participation and clarify candidates’ broad ideological alignment for voters. “We want more voter participation, not less,” a supporter said, arguing partisan ballots help voters know “what the basic principle ideas of the person they’re voting for” are. Another backer said partisan primaries could reduce contention by allowing contests to be decided in party primaries before general elections.
Opponents said the change should be driven by the public rather than a board vote and that partisan labels could exclude unaffiliated voters or make the board beholden to parties. One board member said, “Any kind of change in the way we elect school board candidates ought to come from the public, not from a political party.” Another warned the change could reduce unaffiliated candidates’ access because unaffiliated runs require petition signatures to qualify for the ballot.
Board members also debated whether the county’s prior switch from districts and the committee work that produced the current structure factored into the decision, and several members recommended a countywide public engagement process if any change were considered.
After extended discussion, the board called the question and took a roll vote. The resolution did not pass; the chair announced the recorded outcome as “No: 5, Aye: 2.”
Why it matters: The question affects how school board candidates will appear on ballots and who can most easily get on the ballot. Board members and several speakers told colleagues that any future change should include broader public input or a chartered community process before the board acts.
What’s next: Board members who opposed immediate board-level action recommended convening a countywide public committee or holding additional public hearings before advancing any change to the election method.
