Amendment: Permanent School FundSend more money from the Permanent School Fund to schools each year
Read the full text of the measure: Secretary of State's constitutional amendment page
In plain words
The Permanent School Fund is worth about $2.3 billion to $2.4 billion. Today schools get roughly 2.5% of its value each year (about $68 per student). If this passes, a state law already passed would set the yearly transfer at 4.5% of the fund's average value over three years (about $101 per student, by one estimate). The change does not raise taxes. Higher payments would start in the 2027-28 school year. (sahanjournal.com )
Before and after
| Question | Today | If it passes |
|---|---|---|
| How much schools get from the fund each year | The fund's regular yield, recently roughly 2.5% of its value (not a fixed legal rate) | 4.5% of the fund's average value at the end of the last three fiscal years (a required transfer under the state law) |
| Money per student | About $68 | About $101 (estimate) |
| What the constitution protects | The principal (money saved) must be "perpetual and inviolate" (never spent) | The fund must be managed to keep its buying power over time; growth from investments can be paid out |
| Taxes | No change | No change; the money comes from the fund, not from taxes |
Numbers come from the official ballot title and from the full text and analyses cited on this page, not from the title alone (ballot title ); also see (sahanjournal.com )
Example
Illustration only: a school district with 1,000 students would get about $68,000 a year from the fund today and about $101,000 if this passes (1,000 x $68 and 1,000 x $101, using Sahan Journal's per-student estimates; our math). (sahanjournal.com )
Biggest change
- Replaces the rule that the fund's principal stays "perpetual and inviolate" with a rule to manage the fund so it keeps its purchasing power over time. source: news.ballotpedia.org
- A state law that takes effect only if voters approve requires a transfer of 4.5% of the fund's average net asset value at the end of the preceding three fiscal years to schools each year. Today only interest and dividends can be paid out. source: news.ballotpedia.org
- The amount paid out and how it is split among schools would be set by state law. source: sos.mn.gov (Minnesota Secretary of State)
- Higher payments would begin flowing to schools in September 2027 (effective July 1, 2027). source: axios.com
Who it affects most: Public school districts and charter schools, which would get more money per student for things like curriculum, teacher pay, upkeep and buildings.
Cost to the state: No tax increase. The extra money comes out of the fund itself. By our rough math (not an official estimate), 2.5% of $2.3 billion is about $57.5 million a year and 4.5% is about $103.5 million. No official state cost estimate was found.
Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.
What your vote means
Schools would get 4.5% of the fund's average value over the preceding three fiscal years each year, a required transfer set by the state law that takes effect only if voters approve, starting July 1, 2027 (aid for fiscal year 2028). Today schools get the fund's regular yield, recently roughly 2.5% of its value.
The fund's principal stays untouched, and schools keep getting the fund's regular yield, recently roughly 2.5% of its value (an approximate yield, not a fixed legal rate).
Our one-line summary. Minnesota does not publish an official "what your vote means" statement; the ballot title above is the official description.
Why people want it, and why others object
Why this is on the ballot
The Legislature put this on the ballot. It changes the state constitution, so only another statewide vote can change it back. It passes with YES votes from more than half of all voters who cast a ballot in the election, so leaving it blank counts the same as a NO.
- The fund was set up soon after statehood in 1858, from land the federal government set aside to pay for public schools. Most school trust lands are in 10 northern Minnesota counties; timber and mining have been major sources of money. source: sahanjournal.com
- The Minnesota State Board of Investment manages the fund. Its value grew from $1.3 billion in 2017 to about $2.4 billion, averaging about 8% yearly returns over 10 years. source: sahanjournal.com
- The Legislature passed HF 3900 on May 16, 2026: 134-0 in the House and 43-24 in the Senate (all 24 no votes from Republicans, per Ballotpedia). source: news.ballotpedia.org
- This is the only statewide question on Minnesota's 2026 ballot. source: sos.mn.gov (Minnesota Secretary of State)
Why supporters want it
- Sen. Mary Kunesh (DFL-New Brighton), the Senate author, said it would "provide even more funding for our schools, at no cost to property tax payers" and "Our students deserve all the support we can give them." source: news.ballotpedia.org
- Rep. Spencer Igo (R-Grand Rapids), who led it in the House, said it would raise education funding "at zero cost to the taxpayer." source: sahanjournal.com
- Christine Tucci Osorio, superintendent of North St. Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale schools, said her district would gain about $345,000 a year: "So when I say this is not something to sneeze at, I really mean that." She also called it a "drop in the bucket" next to rising costs. source: axios.com
Why opponents object
- No public statement found. Axios reported that "no major opposition has emerged." The 24 Senate Republicans who voted no were not quoted in the sources we found. source: axios.com
Who backs each side
- For: authors Sen. Mary Kunesh (DFL) and Rep. Spencer Igo (R); legislators, educators, parents and students held "Vote Yes" events (Park Rapids area). No campaign committee or spending figures found. Against: no organized group found. source: pctribune.com
In each side's own words where we could find them, quoted or summarized with a link to the source. We don't endorse either side.
What you will see on your ballot
Official ballot wording, word for word (tap to open)
The official ballot title, word for word from the Secretary of State's official amendment wording .
Increasing funding to school districts
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?
YES
NO
Latest news
Recent reporting from a range of outlets, newest first. We link to it; we don't endorse it.
No articles collected yet for this measure.
Full text of the measure
The amendment rewrites Article XI, Section 8 of the Minnesota Constitution, which sets up the Permanent School Fund. Read it in the Secretary of State's constitutional amendment page , or on the Legislature's page for House File 3900 (2026), enacted as 2026 Laws of Minnesota, Chapter 114 , which also shows the votes in each chamber.
Read more
- Secretary of State: 2026 constitutional amendment
- Minnesota Secretary of State: 2026 constitutional amendment
- Sahan Journal: what the school fund amendment would do
- Axios Twin Cities: school funding amendment faces November vote
We link to analysis from several sources; we don't endorse it.