House Bill 937, titled the Keeping Our Coaches Act, would direct a portion of North Carolina sports betting tax revenue to public school athletic coach salary supplements. The bill amends the statute governing the use of sports wagering tax proceeds to set aside $11 million annually for the Department of Public Instruction, which would then distribute the money to eligible public school units to ensure that eligible athletic coaches receive at least $3,000 per year in combined State and non-State salary supplements.
The bill also establishes conditions for receiving the funds. School units that already provide non-State coach supplements must continue providing at least the same amount, and districts that replace existing local funding with State money would lose eligibility for the following year. Any unused funds at the end of the fiscal year would go to the North Carolina Alliance of YMCAs, Inc. for youth sports programming. The act would take effect July 1, 2025, and apply beginning with the 2025-2026 school year.
HB937 would change North Carolina law by adding a new priority distribution of sports betting tax revenue under G.S. 105-113.128. It would create a dedicated funding stream for athletic coach salary supplements in public school units, impose reporting and maintenance-of-effort requirements on local school systems, and authorize reallocation of unspent funds to youth sports programming. The bill would affect the Department of Public Instruction, the Department of Revenue, public school units, athletic coaches, and the North Carolina Alliance of YMCAs, while leaving the broader sports wagering tax structure in place.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed positively as support for school athletics and coach compensation. The title and structure suggest an effort to use gambling tax revenue for a visible education-related purpose, and there is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials indicating opposition or amendment activity. The bill was simply referred to the House Rules Committee, so the available record does not show broader legislative sentiment beyond introduction.
The main potential point of contention is the use of sports betting tax proceeds for coach pay rather than other state priorities, since the bill earmarks a substantial annual amount from a limited revenue source. Another likely issue is the maintenance-of-effort rule, which requires school units to preserve existing local funding levels and penalizes supplanting, a provision that may be viewed as protecting state dollars from replacing local support but also as limiting local budget flexibility. There may also be debate over whether the funding should go directly to coach supplements or to other education, youth, or public health uses.