Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Vouchers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Guilford County Board to oppose state voucher bills during public comment
Summary
Five public commenters told the board they oppose proposed state voucher legislation identified in remarks as SB406 and HB823, arguing vouchers would divert funds from public schools and exacerbate inequities. Board members acknowledged the comments and discussed advocacy options.
Five speakers used the board’s public‑comment period to urge the Guilford County Board of Education to oppose pending state voucher proposals identified in their remarks as SB406 and HB823.
Phyllis Carter opened public comment by asking the board to be “counted in the number of people who do not only dissent, but have come to support those of you on the board who really believe in public education,” and she named the bills directly: “the proposed school voucher legislation SB406 and HB823 will be evidence not only of our legislators attempting to end public education, but of our letting it happen.”
Several other residents echoed that position. Kimberly Price said she was “appalled by the recent activities of the GOP majority in Raleigh,” arguing voucher proposals are divisive and risk benefiting a few at public expense. Tanya Martin described vouchers as “smoke and mirrors” that would harm public schools by shifting public dollars to private providers. Jack Harrington called vouchers “disastrous public policy” and urged attendees to contact their representatives immediately.
Board members thanked speakers and several reiterated public‑funding concerns in their own comments later in the meeting. Pastor Alan Scharraus and other board members framed vouchers as a threat to public‑school funding and cited statistics about voucher recipients and private schools during their remarks.
The speakers directed their remarks to the board rather than seeking a formal vote; no board action on voucher legislation occurred at the meeting. Several board members said they will continue to engage with state representatives and encourage community advocacy on the issue.
Public comments concluded before the board moved on to the meeting agenda and consent items.
