County and school officials used a joint budget briefing to show how New Hanover County provides the bulk of local funding for New Hanover County Schools and to flag near‑term revenue and capital changes.

The presentation led by county finance staff emphasized that property and sales tax are the county’s primary revenue sources and together account for roughly 82% of available revenue for county services, including school funding, Eric Segal said. Segal also told the committee the county’s operating contribution to the schools in the most recent budget year was about $101,510,894.

The information matters because some recurring, school‑related funding streams will change. “The city of Wilmington’s administered [red‑light camera] program…is discontinuing that program,” Segal said, adding the county and city historically split proceeds and that the loss represents about $1.4 million in annual revenue that has supported schools. Segal also said the county approved a $6.4 million renovation allocation for schools within the last two months that is not yet reflected on the slides presented to the committee.

Why it matters: School leaders and commissioners said the county’s contributions extend beyond the line item shown in a single pie chart. Segal walked through items not captured in the schools’ operating total — examples include county funding for school nurses, mental‑health therapists, school resource officers and capital debt service — and several board members said that combined support raises the effective county contribution substantially above the operating line.

Details from the briefing

- County revenue mix and education spending: Segal said property and sales taxes together supply about 82% of county revenue. The county’s slide showed roughly $114 million categorized as education (a combined figure that included Cape Fear Community College and New Hanover County Schools), with roughly $100 million attributable to the school system and $14 million to the community college. Segal said about $31 million in debt service relates to education, and that roughly two‑thirds of the debt service is for schools.

- County‑funded school services: Segal said the county funds a range of school‑adjacent services. He said the county provides school nurses in every school; the slide presenters said the district’s materials list an “approximate $25,000,000” cost for school nursing, though the committee did not produce a reconciled total on the record. Segal also said the county is funding mental‑health therapists at a total program cost of $4,400,000 for the current year and that the county is paying that full amount for FY25; a prior contract had covered $608,000 but was not renewed. Segal listed school resource officers and other programs as additional county expenditures that support schools but do not appear in the district’s operating total.

- One‑time and special funding sources: Segal told the committee that some FY25 items were paid from hospital escrow proceeds and that the county had allocated $6.4 million for school renovation projects two months earlier; he said the slide deck needs updating to show that allocation. He also reiterated that lottery proceeds are received quarterly and must be spent on capital facility projects, and the presenters agreed to provide historical lottery totals on request.

Reactions and next steps

Members of the school committee and commissioners repeatedly asked for clearer, consolidated charts that show the full county contribution to education (operating plus county‑funded programs plus debt and capital) rather than only the operating allocation line. Commissioner remarks emphasized that county taxpayers fund many school services and that publicly visible single‑line totals can understate the county’s overall contribution.

Eric Segal and school staff agreed to update the slide materials (including the capital allocation and the red‑light revenue change), to provide a clearer breakdown of county versus district funding for items such as school nurses and mental‑health therapists, and to supply historical lottery revenue figures on request.

Votes and meeting actions

The committee took routine procedural votes earlier and at adjournment: a motion to approve the agenda and the minutes was made and seconded and was approved by voice vote; at the meeting’s close a motion to adjourn was made, seconded and approved.

Ending: School staff said they will follow up with revised slide materials and a consolidated schedule showing operating contributions, county‑funded services, capital allocations and debt service so the committee and public can see the full county‑level picture.