WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 937

Keeping Our Coaches Act.

2025-2026 Session Introduced by Eric Ager and 8 co-sponsors

Redirects $11M/year of sports-betting tax funds to DPI to guarantee every eligible public-school athletic coach a combined $3,000 annual supplement, with anti-supplanting and reporting.

Passed 1st Reading
#budgeting;commissions;education;elementaryeducation;employment;funding;gaming;personnel;public;publicinstructiondept.;salaries&benefits;secondaryeducation;sports;stateemployees;lotterycomn.;governmentemployees;schoolstaff
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 937

Summary — HB 937: "Keeping Our Coaches Act"

Status: Passed 1st Reading (House). Sponsors: Rep. Helfrich (primary), Reps. Hawkins, Ager, R. Pierce. Effective date: July 1, 2025; applies beginning with the 2025–2026 school year.

Purpose

To dedicate a portion of sports‑betting tax proceeds to provide salary supplements for public‑school athletic coaches, with the goal of recruiting and retaining coaches by guaranteeing each eligible coach a minimum annual supplement of $3,000 (from state and non‑state sources combined).

Key provisions

  • Amends G.S. 105‑113.128 (use/distribution of tax proceeds from sports betting).
  • Creates a new priority allocation (subdivision 3a): $11,000,000 annually is credited to the Department of Public Instruction (DPI).
  • DPI must allocate these funds to eligible public school units so that each eligible athletic coach receives a total annual salary supplement for coaching of at least $3,000, counting state and non‑state funds.
  • Definitions:
    • Eligible athletic coach: a person employed full time in a public school unit who serves as an athletic coach and who currently receives a non‑state salary supplement for coaching that is equal to or less than $3,000 per school year.
    • Eligible public school unit: a unit that reports to DPI by August 15 each year the amount of non‑state funds provided for coach supplements in the prior year.
  • Maintenance of local funding: any school unit that provided non‑state coach supplements in the prior year must continue to provide at least that amount in non‑state funds.
  • Anti‑supplanting rule: a public school unit that supplants (replaces) its non‑state supplement with State funds provided under this subdivision forfeits eligibility for State supplement funds in the subsequent school year.
  • Unexpended funds: if any of the $11 million allocation is unspent at fiscal year end, remaining amounts are to be allocated to the North Carolina Alliance of YMCAs, Inc., to support youth sports programming.
  • Administrative/priority context: funds are distributed after the Department of Revenue and Lottery Commission administrative reimbursements and consistent with existing statutory distribution priorities. The Department may retain up to $500,000 annually for Article administration.

Who is affected

  • Primary beneficiaries: full‑time public‑school athletic coaches who currently receive (or would receive) coach supplements up to $3,000.
  • Public school units: required to report prior year non‑state supplement amounts and to maintain local supplement levels.
  • Department of Public Instruction: responsible for allocation and oversight.
  • North Carolina Alliance of YMCAs: potential recipient of any unexpended allocation.
  • Source of funding: tax proceeds collected under the State’s sports‑betting tax (after allowed administrative deductions).

Fiscal and operational impact

  • Direct appropriation/commitment: $11 million annually from sports‑betting tax revenues.
  • Local school budgets: must continue prior non‑state supplement levels to remain eligible; administrative/reporting burden to DPI (annual reporting by Aug 15).
  • DPI will need procedures to allocate funds, verify local non‑state contributions, and enforce anti‑supplanting rules.

Implementation timeline and notable rules

  • Effective July 1, 2025; applies to the 2025–2026 school year forward.
  • Annual reporting deadline for school units: August 15.
  • Supplanting penalty: ineligibility for state supplement in the next school year.

Observations (practical effects)

  • The measure creates a targeted, recurring state funding stream intended to raise the minimum coach supplement to $3,000 (combined state and local). This could improve coach retention/recruitment but depends on local compliance and how DPI distributes funds (e.g., full top‑ups versus proportional supplements). The anti‑supplanting clause is designed to preserve local investment but may require audit/monitoring capacity at DPI. Unexpended funds are directed to youth sports via the YMCA, preserving a youth‑sports focus if school uptake is incomplete.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.