SF3094 would increase Minnesota’s safe schools funding formula and create a new safe schools aid component. For school districts, the bill sets safe schools revenue at the greater of $100,000 or $44 per pupil unit beginning in fiscal year 2026, while the district levy remains $36 per adjusted pupil unit. It also adds a new safe schools aid calculation to help cover the gap between revenue and levy, and appropriates general fund money for that aid in fiscal year 2027.
The bill also expands the safe schools framework beyond traditional school districts. It allows member districts of intermediate school districts to levy for safe schools-related costs tied to intermediate programs for fiscal years 2025 and 2026, and it creates a new cooperative units safe schools revenue and aid structure beginning in fiscal year 2027. Under that structure, districts that belong to cooperative units enrolling students would receive additional revenue based on pupil units, with a statewide levy rate set to raise a specified amount each year, and the revenue would be transferred to the cooperative unit.
Impact
The bill amends Minnesota Statutes section 126C.44 to raise safe schools revenue, establish a new safe schools aid formula, and extend safe schools funding authority to cooperative units and certain intermediate school district programs. It changes how school safety funding is generated and distributed, increases the role of state aid in supporting the program, and creates new levy authority and transfer requirements for member districts and cooperative units. The bill also broadens the list of allowable uses for safe schools revenue to include school security, student and staff safety, mental health supports, cybersecurity, and related facility and climate improvements.
Sentiment
The bill’s caption and structure suggest a generally supportive policy direction focused on increasing school safety funding and expanding access to those resources. No committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the text alone, the proposal appears aimed at strengthening and modernizing an existing school safety funding stream rather than restructuring it in a controversial way.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are fiscal and administrative. Increasing levy authority and adding a new general fund appropriation could raise concerns about state and local costs, while the new cooperative-unit formula may prompt questions about distribution fairness, levy complexity, and whether the funding targets the districts with the greatest need. Another possible issue is the broad list of allowable expenditures, which includes both traditional safety measures such as peace officers and security upgrades and broader supports such as counselors, mental health collaboration, and cybersecurity; stakeholders may differ on whether those uses should remain within safe schools revenue.
Safe schools revenue increased; safe schools revenue made available to charter schools, cooperative units, nonpublic schools, and Tribal contract schools; and money appropriated.
Safe schools revenue increased; safe schools revenue available to charter schools, cooperative units, nonpublic schools, and Tribal contract schools made; and money appropriated.
Funding for school safety increased, local optional aid for schools increased, state-paid free school lunches limited to families with incomes at or below 500 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, and money appropriated.
School safety plans enhanced, student discipline provisions modified, anonymous reporting systems enabled, safe schools revenue increased, school building and cybersecurity grant program modified, reports required, and money appropriated.
Relating to the authority of the Wood County Central Hospital District of Wood County, Texas, to provide brain and memory care services to residents of the hospital district through the creation and operation of brain and memory health care services districts.