Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

YWCA Minneapolis generously supports MinnPost’s Education coverage. Learn why.

Competing priorities: Comparing the DFL, GOP and Walz education budgets

MinnPost photo by Peter Callaghan
Leaders of House and Senate education finance and policy committees have each said their budget bills reflect their top education priorities.

With the final competing budget proposals revealed, the choices for how Minnesota will address several pressing education issues are clearer — but there’s still a lot of work in store for lawmakers who need to take three very different targets and pass a budget.

School safety and student mental health, school funding increases, and varied approaches to early childhood education all got attention in spending plans brought by the governor, the House and the Senate. Each plan assigns hundreds of millions of dollars to education-related programs and general funding to school districts, but total new spending ranges from $206 million under the Senate Republicans’ plan to $900 million by the House DFL’s. The governor proposed $718 million in new education funding.

Leaders of House and Senate education finance and policy committees have each said their budget bills reflect their top education priorities.

Senate Committee Chair Carla Nelson, R-Rochester, said it was a difficult decision under the constraints of a low target, but she was optimistic that won’t be where the education budget ends up after negotiations between the House and Senate. During a committee hearing on the budget bill, SF 7, she said she looks forward to getting a revised target on May 6.

Each budget takes into account a lower projected surplus than what lawmakers thought they’d have to work with before the session started in January. Democrats and Republicans are so far apart on education funding because Democrats want to raise the gas tax by 20 cents and stop the health care provider tax from expiring. They also have criticized Republicans for setting low targets for various areas of state spending, including education, because they see it as a negotiating tactic.

“We can’t have this for free,” House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler said during a press conference on the education budget. “If we want a world-class education system that provides opportunity for all kids, we have to pay for it … and we’re not shy about putting the price on the table that it costs to actually do these things.”

School funding

During the 10-day spring break at the Legislature, Minnesota Department of Education Commissioner Mary Cathryn Ricker embarked on another statewide education tour to tout Gov. Tim Walz’s plan, which includes a 3 percent general education funding boost for fiscal year 2020 and another 2 percent for 2021. She said school leaders she’s meeting with this week hope to see that hefty increase in the final budget.

“We have a lot of experts in the field telling us what they need,” Ricker told MinnPost, “and I think the focus of our budget work has to be meeting those needs.”

While the House plan also includes the same increases as the governor seeks over the next two years, totaling $521 million, the state Senate plans for much smaller bumps in general education spending. The Senate majority would put $95 million toward 0.5 percent increases each year.

Meadow Lake Elementary School
MinnPost photo by Taryn Phaneuf
Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, Gov. Tim Walz and Education Commissioner Mary Cathryn Ricker speaking to students at Meadow Lake Elementary School.
But the Senate does not include any new funding for the special education cross subsidy. The cross subsidy refers to the shortfall between the cost of mandated special education services and funding districts receive from state and federal aid to cover it. Districts subsidize special education with general education dollars received from the state.

Base funding for special education automatically increases each year, but it isn’t enough to keep up with rising costs.

The governor proposes spending $91 million to freeze the cross subsidy for two years. The House would allocate about $118 million. Both plans would include changes to how much of their unfunded special education costs charter schools can bill back to students’ home districts.

Previously, Nelson said she wanted to tackle the issue, too.

Sen. Chuck Wiger, DFL-Maplewood, the ranking minority member on the Senate education committee, underlined the missing cross subsidy funding, telling Nelson he hopes they will be able to adopt proposals from the House during negotiations. “This was No. 1 even above formula by many districts,” he told committee members.

Safety and mental health

Each of the three competing budgets seeks to fund school safety and student mental health initiatives, but, as with everything else, their approaches differ. The proposals follow up on efforts last year that didn’t get past Dayton’s end-of-session veto.

To start, Walz proposes spending $17.3 million to increase the safe schools levy from $36 to $41 per pupil for 2020 and to $50 per pupil for 2021 and beyond. This revenue can be used for infrastructure and staffing, Ricker said. But the governor’s plan includes allowing schools to use the revenue for programs, as well.

“Schools are trying to do more and more and with social and emotional learning. … We wanted to expand that school safety money to be allowable for programming as well because our school districts are hungry for it,” Ricker said.

The House and Senate would increase safe schools revenue through a combination of levy and state aid, according to an analysis by Schools for Equity in Education. The House proposes increasing school safety revenue to $45 per student in 2020 through state aid and increasing the levy to $54 per student beginning in 2021 at a cost of $24 million. The Senate would spend $75 million to increase revenue to $38 per student – all through state aid – for 2020-21.

Spending plans include one more common thread on mental health: They would each put more money toward grants that bring mental health services to schools. The governor and the House budget $9.4 million, and the Senate budgets $5 million.

Fulfilling what they said at the start of the session, DFLers and the governor would fund full-service community schools, which include mental health services for students who can’t afford to access these services and other services outside of school. Walz puts $4 million toward these grants and the House puts $15 million.

The House plan includes funding for several other related grant programs that fund mental health positions and train staff about trauma.

Early education

Walz and House DFLers started the session putting a high priority on preserving 4,000 Voluntary Pre-K seats in districts around the state. Those slots are set to expire at the end of the year if the Legislature doesn’t act.

Keeping those pre-K seats open would cost $47 million.

The Senate version wouldn’t renew any of the Voluntary Pre-K funding, instead putting nearly all of that money (about $45 million) toward Early Learning Scholarships. “That funding is continued. It is continued in a targeted manner with targeted parent scholarships,” Nelson said during committee discussion of the budget bill. She added that sites that benefited from the previous years’ funding presumably have a head start and would be able to compete for the scholarships.

“I believe many parents have already experienced [Voluntary Pre-K] with local public schools. They may decide to use those sites in the future,” she said.

Ricker said districts and the families that attend their schools have come to expect those pre-K slots and have invested in teaching those students. Some have undergone projects to repurpose spaces for these young students. That’s why it was included in the state budget. “The conversion in the Senate — it’s an apples and oranges comparison,” she said. “There is not an indication that those same spots will be there.”

This year’s budget lacks support for former Gov. Mark Dayton’s universal pre-K plan. Rep. Dave Pinto, DFL-St. Paul, who chairs the Early Childhood Finance and Policy Committee, said limited resources was an issue. “Within the funding that we had, we felt good about the choice we made,” he said.

MinnPost photo by Peter Callaghan
Rep. Dave Pinto, DFL-St. Paul, who chairs the Early Childhood Finance and Policy Committee, said limited resources was an issue in the budget.
The House budget includes funding for both Early Learning Scholarships (about $26 million) and Voluntary Pre-K, which Pinto called a “balanced approach” that aims to leverage having multiple funding streams.

“We’re talking about a system in terms of early care and learning that has been underinvested in for decades,” he told MinnPost. “Overall, my feeling at each step has been that this is an area of early childhood that deserves much more attention, much more funding. We all benefit when that happens. Rather than pitting one particular approach against each other, they each have strengths.”

Comments (22)

  1. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 04/17/2019 - 10:35 am.

    Maybe I’m missing something but it looks like once again Republicans are budgeting zero new spending, and demanding yet more tax and revenue cuts. I don’t know why we can’t just say that.

  2. Submitted by Gene Nelson on 04/17/2019 - 10:54 am.

    It is difficult for me to understand repub thinking on education, when…if you look around the country…the vast majority of WORST K-12 educational systems are located in repub states. Repubs are always claiming we spend too much on education…which to me…makes no sense.

    In the 70s, I could buy all my groceries for $25 for the week or more. Today…if I were to do that…for a family of 4…it would probably be closer to $200.

    Costs have continued to increase and increase and to me…repubs are ignoring that while undermining our education. Perhaps, they just do not value a quality education for the public?

    • Submitted by Frank Phelan on 04/17/2019 - 08:20 pm.

      Once you realize that conservatives don’t have a good grasp of basic economics, their actions are much more understandable.

    • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/18/2019 - 12:40 pm.

      Spending on public education has risen by 375% in the last 30 years ( ). Seems like an awful lot to me, but as friend Phalen suggests, we conservatives just don’t get economics. Maybe you can help us understand.

      Over the same 30 years:

      What has the effective inflation rate been?

      What has happened to the size of the public school cohort; more kids, less?

      How has that seemingly massive increase in the investment improved test scores? Grad rates?

      I’m really looking forward to being enlightened on this subject. Thanks in advance.

      • Submitted by Joel Stegner on 04/23/2019 - 08:12 pm.

        Do you realize the massive social changes that happened? The decline of the middle class? A significant percentage of students who are homeless? More adequate pay for teachers? Increasing graduation rates, more important than test scores. School safety costs – a brand new expenses. Don’t offer simplistic explanations that fail to reflect what our society is like twenty years into a once new millennium.

    • Submitted by lee wick on 04/23/2019 - 02:32 pm.

      Focus on MN, not the country.

  3. Submitted by David Lundeen on 04/17/2019 - 11:19 am.

    As a former teacher, I like a lot of what Walz is proposing. However, I don’t believe the budget goes far enough. For starters, every teacher should be getting a $10,000 no questions asked. More importantly, greater focus needs to be given, and funded, for more career training in our schools. We don’t have an achievement gap, rather it’s an opportunity gap.

  4. Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/17/2019 - 12:50 pm.

    The Democrats have received everything they wanted for the past 8 years. There is absolutely no reason to believe they won’t continue that streak for at least the next 4.

    The GOP will shuffle around a little, maybe stamp their feet, but in the end they’ll fold, as always. Best if they save everyone’s time and just tell the House to send whatever they want over and pass it.

    Minnesota is a leftist state now. Let the leftists run it.

  5. Submitted by Frank Phelan on 04/17/2019 - 05:23 pm.

    Those GOP majorities rolled over and gave Dayton everything he wanted?

    Mr. Senker, what a jokester. (I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you are joking. You’re much too intelligent to think we’d believe that who-ha.)

    • Submitted by Curtis Senker on 04/18/2019 - 11:56 am.

      You’re right; I am intelligent. Baseless comments don’t impress me. You’re going to have to provide a warrant for your opinion; maybe start a new tradition for your fellow leftist commentators.

      Name us a couple of things the Democrats and Dayton wanted over the past 8 years, but the GOP successfully withheld in any substantial way.

  6. Submitted by Terry Frawley on 04/19/2019 - 09:52 am.

    Universal pre-kindergarten is not the solution to Minnesota’s achievement gap

    It is accepted that kindergarten readiness is the key to solving the achievement gap. Gov. Tim Walz is pushing universal pre-kindergarten (UPK) as the way to address the education gap.
    Unfortunately, UPK does not pass the most basic of tests. First, it is not in line with research from high-quality universities:
    “By age two we can already predict third-grade reading scores. So many of the things we think are happening later in life actually had their beginnings in early childhood or infancy,” said Megan Gunnar, director of the Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota (Child Development Core Story, Part 1: Brain Architecture). Intervention at 4 years of age is too late to make a meaningful difference in children.
    Second, 18 school districts have 100 percent graduation rates, 84 have graduation rates over 95 percent. Costs for UPK are approximately $7,500 per child and clearly not necessary for all children. The Wayzata School District has an estimated 800 pre-kindergarten eligible students, UPK would cost the state $6 million dollars. Based on historical graduation rates 42 of these kids won’t graduate in four years. A broad-brush solution is too expensive. Wouldn’t we be better served by finding these kids early and providing intervention when it will make a difference?
    Finally, states have been implementing UPK since the 1980s. Comparing Minnesota’s graduation rates with states that implemented UPK, you will find there is basically no difference. For example, Oklahoma has been running pre-kindergarten since 1990 and has a graduation rate of 83 percent, and Georgia began in 1993, and the current graduation rate is 81 percent. Minnesota’s graduation rate is 83 percent.
    The achievement gap is solvable if the legislature puts children above special interests and listens to and finds solutions using the latest research.
    Scientists have determined that the critical time for learning is in the first three years of a child’s life. The stresses caused by poverty are the key reasons for the achievement gap. The achievement gap is a symptom of the problem and responsibility for it should be housed at the Minnesota Department of Human Services.

    Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten would waste $47,000,000. Put that money towards scholarships!

  7. Submitted by Terry Frawley on 04/22/2019 - 09:20 am.

    With all respect to Rep. Dave Pinto, common sense has to enter into this issue in the Early Childhood Finance and Policy Committee. A balanced approach implies that both options help solve the Opportunity Gap. In April 2018 the Office of Legislative Auditor issued finding on this (see

    Among the findings was “Statutes require certain early childhood programs to report on aspects of program effectiveness, but existing data are inadequate to evaluate performance statewide. (p. 54)”

    Bottom line is the MDE is failing to provide the legislature adequate data to determine how to spend out money on Early Childhood Investments. The result is a waste of $47,000,000.

  8. Submitted by Ron Peterson on 04/28/2019 - 09:40 am.

    A State that thinks it can short change its young people’s educational needs and think it’s future will be bright is not the forward thinking State that Minnesota is known for. Special needs funding is also woefully short. Republicans need to step up!

  9. Submitted by Jon Person on 05/14/2019 - 11:29 pm.

    I think one thing not mentioned in all of this is that school districts can try to get more money through local referendums. In our school district the voters value education and seem to always vote yes on referendums. I would rather have direct input on the local level than have it built in at a State level. At least this way I know my tax money is benefiting my own children.

Leave a Reply