Residents urge Dare County Schools to adopt clearer limits on immigration enforcement at schools

Four members of the public urged the Dare County Board of Education at its Feb. 10 meeting to adopt a written policy restricting immigration‑enforcement activity on school campuses and to clarify staff procedures so students feel safe in schools.

The comments, offered during the board’s public‑comment period, focused on the emotional and educational effects of immigration enforcement on children and on practical steps the district could take. Heidi Hess, a Kitty Hawk resident, said the board’s recent statement on immigration enforcement “does not live up to [the district’s] mission in the slightest,” and urged greater empathy and transparency for affected students and families. Hess also criticized recent board pay increases while noting community concerns about student lunch debt.

Miriam Rollin, who identified herself as a Duck resident, asked the board to adopt a policy modeled on Wake County Public Schools’ guidance. Rollin cited Plyler v. Doe and summarized key provisions she wants Dare County Schools to include: that schools not ask students or families about immigration status; that staff verify an immigration agent’s identity and rely on a judicially‑issued warrant before granting access; that agents not approach or interview students in classrooms absent exigent circumstances; and that parents be notified if an agent requests a student. Janine Emery and Mikel Sanchez (a parent and former substitute teacher) offered similar appeals and personal accounts of fear and perceived discrimination.

Board discussion was limited. A district staff member, Mr. Bassnite, told the board the district has board policies and daily procedures that cover removal of students and interactions with law enforcement. He said officials will follow board policy, state law and federal law, and told the meeting he does not believe the Wake County webpage is itself a board policy: “I do not believe that the statement on the Wake County site is board policy. I think it’s a statement that they issued,” he said. Bassnite emphasized that staff will require a judge‑signed warrant before releasing students to law‑enforcement custody and that the district will contact parents.

No formal action or vote on a new immigration policy was taken at the meeting. Several commenters requested expedited action from the board; the district's response at the meeting described current procedures rather than adopting new written policy.

The public commenters provided citations and background for board consideration: Rollin referenced the Wake County guidance (link submitted to the board) and cited Plyler v. Doe; Emery referenced changes to federal policy and Buncombe County Sheriff’s policies; commenters also supplied materials from the American Immigration Council. The board did not put a new policy on the floor during the Feb. 10 meeting.

The board’s next steps were not stated on the record; no motion was made to draft or refer an immigration‑related policy for committee review.