Minnesota ballot measure would increase funding for public schools

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) – In six days, Minnesota voters will consider a ballot proposal that would affect school funding across the state.

The legislatively-referred constitutional amendment would change the administrative policies for investing and distributing Minnesota’s constitutionally-established Permanent School Fund, which provides funding for public education.

That is the only ballot measure on Minnesota’s ballot this election cycle.

The Permanent School Fund was established in 1858, meaning it has played a role in Minnesota’s public education funding for nearly 170 years. According to the Minnesota School Boards Association website, the fund “is supported by trust land assets and revenue from land sales, timber, mining, leases and other resources.”

In the last 15 years, the fund has grown from $675 million to $2.3 billion.

The amendment is seeking to increase fund distributions from about 2.5% to 4.5%, with districts receiving the funding as an additional per-pupil allocation. The percentage would be calculated as the fund’s average net asset value over the preceding three fiscal years.

The amendment asks:

“Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to increase the funding going to all school districts from the permanent school fund, which is a fund that supports school districts without raising individual income or property taxes, effective July 1, 2027?”

Currently, schools receive on average about $68 per pupil. If passed, that would increase to about $101 per pupil.

Schools across the state are supportive of the amendment passing, especially noting that a “yes” vote does not mean an increase in property, incomes, sales, or other taxes.

“The proposed Permanent School Fund constitutional amendment is an opportunity to support Minnesota’s public schools without asking taxpayers to contribute more,” said East Central Schools Superintendent Stefanie Youngberg in a recent op-ed. “This proposal is not about raising taxes. It is about making better use of a resource Minnesota already has.”

The Minnesota Association of School Administrators addressed concerns about the potential of the fund being drained.

“It would change how annual distributions are calculated, but it would also place a different long-term protection into the Minnesota Constitution: the fund would have to remain a perpetual financial resource, with management designed to preserve its purchasing power over time while balancing the needs of current and future beneficiaries,” the association said.

It has also come out in support of the amendment.

“Minnesota has spent generations building the Permanent School Fund,” it said. “The question before voters isn't whether that fund should continue to exist. Under the proposed constitutional language, it would remain a perpetual financial resource dedicated to public education. The question is how that resource should serve Minnesota students—both today and decades from now.”