Constitutional Amendment: Increasing Funding to School Districts From the Permanent School Fund

The law today

Article XI, Section 8 of the Minnesota Constitution now provides that the permanent school fund's principal "shall be perpetual and inviolate forever" and that only the net interest and dividends from the fund are distributed to school districts (the text the amendment would delete). Per the House Research bill summary, that distribution is roughly 2.5 percent of the fund's net asset value a year and has ranged between 2 and 2.5 percent for the last decade, and by statute is paid on a uniform per-pupil basis to all school districts and charter schools; capital gains cannot be distributed.[6][9]

Official fiscal estimate

No separate fiscal note was located. Per the Minnesota House Research Department, the amendment and companion statute would raise the annual distribution from roughly 2.5 percent to 4.5 percent of the three-year average net asset value of the fund. The House's Session Daily reports the fund's principal was $2.2 billion as of March 2025 and distributed a record $58 million in the 2024-25 school year, and that the change would represent an additional $27.19 per pupil, a 28% increase; CBS Minnesota reports about $33 more per pupil ($68 to $101). Supporters, including Rep. Patricia Mueller, state it requires no increase in taxes and no draw on the state General Fund.[9][2][8]

Arguments made for

• House DFL Floor Leader Jamie Long (DFL-Minneapolis): "The challenge that we are facing is that there is a large amount of money that is being well invested by the State Board of Investment, but it’s not being distributed. … This is really about putting that money to use."[2]
• Rep. Patricia Mueller (R-Austin): "This is an opportunity to strengthen education funding in Minnesota without raising taxes and without drawing from the state General Fund."[2]
• Minnesota Association of School Administrators: it supports the amendment "because the organization believes the new framework would make greater use of an existing education asset, provide additional resources to public schools throughout Minnesota, and maintain constitutional requirements intended to preserve the fund for future generations."[4]

Arguments made against

• None found in public sources.

On record in support

• Rep. Spencer Igo (R-Grand Rapids) and Sen. Mary Kunesh (DFL-New Brighton) (chief sponsors; urged a Yes vote at a Capitol news conference)[10]
• A bipartisan group of legislators, educators, school board members and groups representing students, campaigning as "Vote Yes for Minnesota Students"[10]
• Minnesota Association of School Administrators[4]
• House DFL Floor Leader Jamie Long (DFL-Minneapolis) and Rep. Patricia Mueller (R-Austin) (spoke for the bill on the House floor; it passed 133-0 in the House on May 4 and 134-0 on final passage)[2][5]

On record in opposition

• None found in public sources.