Sullivan County officials voted to adopt a resolution opposing a proposed state education savings-account (ESA) voucher program and objecting to any effort to link that proposal to hurricane relief funding or immigration policy.

The action came after a series of public comments from teachers and residents who raised concerns about the proposed bill’s design, its likely effect on public-school funding and its accountability measures. The resolution was approved by roll call with members voting in favor: Hughes, McKinley, Price, Robinson, Dr. Rouse, Stanley and Vickers.

The resolution was presented for discussion by Mr. Carter, who said local officials drafted language to make clear “there should be no connection between providing funding for public education and … a voucher program,” and asked for discussion and a motion on the draft. Multiple public commenters — many identifying themselves as teachers or parents — urged the governing body to oppose the bill and outlined specific concerns about eligibility rules, accountability and long-term fiscal effects.

Commenters said the draft legislation would award up to 20,000 scholarships in an initial period and that the bill’s rules for allocating those awards could favor households well above typical low-income thresholds. One commenter described the proposal as enriching families already able to afford private schools, saying, “vouchers are nothing but for rich people.” Other speakers warned that private schools could select students and decline students with disabilities, and that the state’s funding rules could reduce per-student revenue for public districts if students shift to private schools.

Speakers cited additional provisions they said were problematic: a stated base scholarship amount commonly discussed in the comments as $7,000, language tying future scholarship counts to prior-year application rates (a trigger described in testimony as increasing scholarship slots if applications exceed 75% of available awards), and explicit language in the draft bill limiting the state’s regulatory authority over private schools that accept scholarship recipients. Commenters also raised concerns about gaps in the bill’s language for what happens to scholarship funds if a student is removed from a private school midyear.

After public comment and brief discussion, the body voted to adopt the resolution. The meeting record shows a unanimous roll-call vote for the members present (Hughes; McKinley; Price; Robinson; Dr. Rouse; Stanley; Vickers). Officials requested a printed copy of the adopted resolution to be signed after adjournment.

Speakers and commenters pointed to other Tennessee local governments and school boards that have already adopted similar opposing resolutions and said the county’s action was intended to register local concern ahead of a state special session called by Gov. Bill Lee. The resolution directs no specific policy changes at the county level; it is a formal statement of opposition and a request that state lawmakers not tie public-school funding to a voucher program or condition disaster relief on passage of the voucher language.

The governing body did not record any amendments to the draft resolution during the meeting; members indicated they would circulate and sign the adopted copy after the meeting adjourned.