Minnesota has a very complex school funding system that creates inequities between school districts and frustrations between the school and taxpayers.
These inequities can create differences, or gaps, among public school districts across Minnesota in graduation rates, achievement levels, early childhood programs, dual credit (high school and college) course offerings, discipline rates and diversity of teachers.
One measure of equity that has received less attention is the disparity between school districts in the local property taxes that must be approved by voters through referendums.
Information supplied by Robert W. Baird & Co. in late 2017 demonstrates the inequity in funding of public school referendums in Minnesota. Baird compared the impact of a $15,000-per-student, 20-year capital bond across the 332 Minnesota public school districts.
The cost to a residential homestead with a taxable valuation of $150,000 varied from a low of $24.34 to a high of $483.54 (with a median of $202.35). That one property owner with the same value property would have to pay nearly 20 times more in tax for the same per-student bond should outrage taxpayers in this state. The same type of difference exists across all classes of property, including commercial and industrial, ag homestead and non-ag homestead (bare agricultural land).
Differences in costs for an operating levy also exist but are smaller, with the cost of a $1,000-per-pupil levy on a $150,000 residential homestead varying from $105.98 to $310.57, with an average of $267.26 — still a difference of 193 percent from high to low.
The major cause of the disparity is the value of taxable property in each school district. Some assume that this is a rural vs. urban situation, but it is not. Property-rich districts, those having a large commercial/industrial or bare ag land base per pupil, have a much lower tax rate than property-poor districts. Some rural districts that have a large ag land base and relatively few students have a low cost for a bond but a high cost for an operating levy because bare ag land is excluded from funding operating levies.
For example, taxpayers in the Chokio-Alberta district would pay $45 a year for a bond that similarly situated taxpayers in Fridley would pay $436 for. For an operating levy that would cost Hopkins taxpayers $112, Chokio-Alberta property owners would pay $286.